2015 Mustang 2.3L EcoBoost 4 Cylinder: Specs & Overview

2015 Mustang Streets of NYCDefined by the first turbo 4 cylinder motor to be found the Mustang’s hood since the 1986 SVO and the overly impressive 305 horsepower it squeezes out of a mere 2.3 liter engine, the new 2015 EcoBoost Mustang is a game changer.

Some argue a 4 cylinder doesn’t belong in a Mustang and others call it natural progression, but regardless of which side of the fence you’re on, the 4 cylinder Mustang is here to stay. One thing there’s no arguing about is that it does have Mustang worthy power–the all-new 2.3L EcoBoost 4 cylinder is said to pump out a startling 305HP, 300LBS of torque and will likely weigh less than the 2015 GT and base model V6. That’s 5 more horsepower than the base model V6 will have, and with its turbocharged nature, there’s no denying that some will find ways to increase its power output well past factory rated levels.

Rear of 2015 Mustang at Good Morning AmericaThere’s also no denying that Ford is as committed to the 4 cylinder as the 6th generation Mustang will be sold in overseas markets. There’s also no guarantee they’ll be offering all three motors to our friends across the way–upon trying to confirm or rebut this, Ford’s Social Media Manager Scott Monty did not offer any information on which motors would be offered overseas, leading one to believe they would be excluding at least one offering from the lineup, most likely the V6. The European market is also supposed to receive a “stiffer suspension” setup than their US counterparts, according to Ford’s Chief Engineer Frank Davis. Davis also declared the V6 a US-only offering.

For those curious as to where outside the US the Mustang will be sold, see the map below:

Where The 2015 Mustang Will Be Sold

As for performance, the 4 cylinder shares many of its bells and whistles with the GT if not as a standard feature, as an optional performance package upgrade.

2015 Mustang – EcoBoost 4 Cylinder Specifications


Compare (in inches): 2015 Mustang – wheelbase 107.1, length 188.3, width 75.4, height 54.4, front track 62.3, rear track 64.9

2014 Mustang – wheelbase 107.1, length 188.5, width 73.9, height 55.8, front track 62.3, rear track 62.9

Differences (2015 vs 2014 Mustang): (-.2) in overall length, (+1.5) in overall width, (-1.4) in overall height, (+2) in rear track


Front Face of 2015 Mustang at Good Morning America- 2.3 Liter Ecoboost I4 – 140 cubic inch/2,300 cc

- At or greater than 305HP @ 5,500 rpm, 300 lb foot torque at 2,500-4,500 rpm

- 9.5:1 compression ratio

- aluminum block, aluminum cylinder head

- 3-port integrated into head exhaust manifold

- DOHC: 4 valves per cylinder w/ twin independent variable camshaft timing

- cast aluminum pistons

- forged steel connecting rods

- 87 octane fuel

- direct injection, 15.5 gallon fuel tank

- takes 6 quarts 5w-30


-Standard 6 speed manual transmission (Hill Start Assist)

- Gear ratios: 1st: 4..236, 2nd: 2.538, 3rd: 1.665, 4th: 1.238, 5th: 1.00, 6th: 0.704

- Optional 6 speed automatic transmission (with paddle shifters)

- Gear Ratios: 1st: 4.17, 2nd: 2.34, 3rd: 1.52, 4th: 1.14, 5th: 0.87, 6th: 0.69


- Front: double ball joint independent MacPherson strut & tubular sway bar

- Rear: integral-link independent rear suspension with coil springs, solid stabilizer bar & twin or mono tube dampers


2015 Mustang AmericanMuscle- Front: 12.6inch x 33mm vented discs, twin-piston floating aluminum calipers

- Front: Optional Performance Package (standard on 2015 GT): 13.9inch x 12mm vented discs, four piston 46mm fixed aluminum calipers

- Rear: 12.6in x 12mm solid discs, single piston 45mm floating aluminum calipers, integral parking brake

- Rear: Optional Performance Package (standard on 2015 GT): 13inch x 25mm vented discs, single piston 45mm floating iron calipers; parking brake

Wheels + Tires

- Standard: 17 x 7.5 inch, 235/55R H A/S

Optional: 18×8 with 235/50R W A/S, 18×8.5 with 255/40R W A/S, 20×9 with 265/35R W, summer performance package: 19×9 with 255/40R Y

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
  • Wayde Sutton

    So the 3.7L V6 is losing 5hp from 2014 to 2015?

    • Andrew Cilio

      Yep, they dialed it down a hair, likely because people might be confused as to which Mustang is the base model. The EcoBoost 4 is probably going to cost a couple grand more than the V6

      • Dan Heller

        I suspect the EB 2.3 will have considerably more than 305/300.

        • Andrew Cilio

          I hope so, I find the 305HP out of the 2.3L too close to the dialed down V6 to make it as appealing to a new buyer as it should be. Plus, it leaves a hell of a gap in performance when looking up at the 435+HP GT

          • Benjamin Reynolds

            I bet the 2.3L EB will have a much better curve than the V6. Making for a better daily.

          • Michael Santosuosso

            Then you add a boost controller, exhaust, and a dyno tune and the hp. goes up by 90 and the tq. by 150, then your cookin w/ gas, just look at how the F-150 Ecoboost responds to a tune, exhaust and bigger intercooler!!! Yowzaa!!

        • Michael Santosuosso

          Probably to the tires! On the 67U V6 Performance Pkg in 2011, a bone stock 2011 V6 Perf. Pkg. dynoed 306 hp. TO THE TIRES!! on K&N ‘s Dyno! (K&N Air Filters)..FYI

  • http://www.stangbarn.com/ StangBarn.com

    I was always a fan of the SVO Mustang. Love that they’re bringing back a turbo 4 cylinder. Variety is the spice of life, right? – Josh @ http://www.stangbarn.com

    • Jeff M

      Garlic is the spice of life.

    • mustang6984

      I have one of the SVO’s…and ’84. And believe me, when the turbo kicks in…you KNOW it! With the new technology of this 2300 and turbo combo, it is making 110 horses more than mine does. And has another 115 ft. lbs. of torque!

      Yea, this will not be taking a backseat to anyone in it;s class…or even the class above for the most part!

      • Michael Santosuosso

        It also weighs 483 lbs. more than your 1984 SVO @ 3532lbs. w/ a manual, your SVO tips the scales @ 3049 lbs. Better gearing in the 15′ will undoubtedly help it perform better too. Ford also ‘BITCHED” out on the Ecoboosts pistons, using “cast pistons” as opposed to “forged pistons” as they did on the 2003-2004 Terminator Cobra, which we all know can handle ridiculous amounts of boost on the stock internals!!! The current generation of Engineers at SVT must all be PUSSYS who folded to the Management. FORD could take a lesson or two from a CEO with balls between his legs, who is that might you ask? Ralph Gilles, CEO of SRT @ Dodge…Father of the 707hp Hellcat!! You go Ralphy boy!!!!

  • AnneHappy

    Exhaust ports w/ matching twin-scroll turbo is awesome!

    Andrew, does 2.3L have completely new missions or share (w/ different ratio) manual & auto with V8? Will all models have 8.8 differentials? thanks ;)

    • Herman Campbell

      All will have the 8.8 not 100% sure on transmission gearing but believe its the same.

  • Jeff M

    The last production 4cyl Mushtang was in 1993.

    • Vittorio D’Antuono


      • Jeff M


        • Vittorio D’Antuono

          It’s Mustang, just to let you know.

          • Jeff M

            You’re kinda young ain’tcha. Mushtang, Thunderchicken, Table, Saurus etc. are terms of affection. Context my friend, context.

          • Vittorio D’Antuono

            I’m Italian so maybe I’m not familiar with that kind of terminology. But yeah, if it’s a term of affection I guess it’s fine then. Just wanted to make sure that you know how that word is spelled actually.

  • Sid from Detroit

    Regression is not something Ford entertains. Upon reading this article, I understood the 2015 v6 model to boast 310 hp, whilst the EB model 305 hp. Given, however, the price difference in the base model and up, will fuel efficiency create the necessary marginal incentive?

    • Herman Campbell

      V6 will actually have 300hp and in the neighborhood of 30 less ft-lbs vs the Ecoboost. V6 is just for base models ecoboost will be the better performer and much better MPG.

      • mustang6984

        Just like in the days of the SVO. When those were available, they OUTPERFORMED the V-8 of the day, had 55 more horses, and another 75 ft. lbs. of torque than the V-8 Mustangs. But no one would believe it. So, after 3 years and only about 9800 sold in that 36 months, they were discontinued.

        Let’s hope the marketing on these little demons is better than in the ’84-’86 era. (full disclosure…I have one of those ’84 SVO’s.)

  • David D-Chaos Teruel

    Your info is wrong. I have a 90 Mustang LX hatchback and it has a stock v4 under the hood…

    • Jeff M


    • mustang6984

      Does NOT have a V-4! No such motor was EVER put into a Mustang!

      Perhaps a I-4…(in-line 4 cylinder) There is no V-4 in Fords engine line-up…never has been as far as I know.

      • Jeff M

        The Taunus V4 was in the original Mustang I. The ’90 came with an I4 like I said. You’re obviously online, look it up.

        • mustang6984

          The V-4 you speak of was for European cars, and was ONLY in the concept car of ’61-’62. I was never in production, as was that car never in production (I have laid hands on that car, and have several pics of it that I took in ’04 at the 40th Anniversary show in Nashville)

          NO Mustang ever sold has had a V-4. Nor will they. The 4-cyliner coming out in the ’15 Mustang is an I-4. It is a 2300 4cylinder with turbos. Will be rated at OVER 300 horses and ft. lbs. of torque. More than double the hp of the early 80′s Fox Body Mustang GT which came with a 302 V-8. This Mustang will be NO slouch, yet will still get decent fuel economy. Like my ’84 SVO which has a I-4 with turbo and is rated at 185 hp and gets 30 mpg.

          • Jeff M

            The V-4 was in many cars as a production engine. The first ’80′s GT was 157hp (*2 = 314 which is LESS “than double the hp of the early 80′s Fox Body Mustang GT which came with a 302 V-8″). While I prefer the 85.5/6 SVO, they are great cars that are highly under-appreciated.

          • mustang6984

            You wanna call me a liar for 14 horses? LOL!!! Okay.

            Point is, I-4 to be set into the ’15 Mustang is a much more potent engine than the V-8 of days gone by. and economically head & shoulders above as well.

            The V-4 has not been produced for American cars…concept…yes…produced for use in American cars…no. It was used in limited fashion in German cars made by Ford, and in it’s association with SAAB, back in the early 60′s. (The engine was designed in ’62.) It has had some limited use as an industrial engine for machinery.

          • Michael Santosuosso

            175 on the 1984!!

            Mustang SVO horsepower and torque ratings
            1984 175 hp (130 kW) @ 4400 rpm 210 lb·ft (280 N·m) @ 3000 rpm
            1985 175 hp (130 kW) @ 4400 rpm 210 lb·ft (280 N·m) @ 3000 rpm
            1985.5 205 hp (153 kW) @ 5000 rpm 248 lb·ft (336 N·m) @ 3200 rpm
            1986 200 hp (149 kW) @ 5000 rpm 240 lb·ft (330 N·m) @ 3200 rpm

  • Zach Arguello

    How much does it weigh??

  • Christian Gibbs

    How much hp to the wheels though?

  • Michael Harris

    To bad today’s SVO is 1000 lbs heavier. So they have barely under 1 lb separating the two in the weight to power arena. that means 0-60: 6.2 to 6.6 sec. And the Europeans get the better tuned suspension which is why our 5.0 performance pack doesn’t run any faster than a old track pack on a roadcourse, and new 5.0 is slower in the 1/4 by 1/2 a sec and 2 mph. I injured my left ankle and was forced to buy an automatic 2014 5.0…it’s just s fast as my 13′ 5.0 stick. Infact as speed climb over 100, the auto gets faster. Turns out the gearing in the auto is equal to a manual with a 3.90 rearend, even with its 3.15 eonomy rear, the trans has short gears. With just a tune, K&N drop-in and X-pipe on oem A/S Pirellis, I ran a 12.5@114 with a 1.899 60′ ft. I’ve been racing cars over 30 yrs. On any OEM street tires, just clean off and heat the tires till you can smell rubber, and maybe a wisp of smoke that dissipates in a few seconds, that’s it. No smoky burn out, nothing. Again, this is the auto: Line up, hold the throttle at 2000 rpm, launch at last yellow (usually 3rd yellow), don’t wait for it to turn green, this is NOT the local traffic intersection. the autos put the power down much better than the sticks. The auto is a little slower to 60 mph stock but the tune fixes that quickly. Dont waste $$ on aftermarket CAI’s, they are worthless. Tuning/speed shops are experts at fudging the numbers on a dyno. But at the 1/4 mi,the truth is told. A tuned only 5.0 is as fast as a tuned-CAI and X-pipe car. 8-12 hp more is NOT going to make the car any faster 15-20 hp will.

    Also, folks, since the PP 5.0 is actually no faster around a track than a old track pack car, order a base 5.0 with the 3.55′s and put some much better, grippier pilot Supersports on. You’ll save about 60 lbs by not having the 15″ GT500′s frt brakes and larger rears. Keep equipment low. That’s a 85 lb heavier car. All these tests have been on loaded PP 5.0′s or loaded Eco cars. These loaded cars add 150-205 lbs.

    There’s no real performance advantage with 93 octane vs 91, either….. Tune for 96-100 octane, yes a 5-7 hp gain is possible… But the dynos I’ve been seeing on 91 & 93 are disappointing on 5.0… Realistically, 93 fuel is putting down around 425-428 crank hp and 91 is around 417-420 crank hp. 87 is 410 crank hp…. And automatics still have their typical 18-23 hp loss… So deduct 18-23 for an automatic from the above numbers. It is disappointing that Ford has lied, yes LIED about the performance of these cars, and hp numbers. Dave Pericak and Frank Davis need to be fired or put on the fiesta line. It’s that simple. These 5.0 PP cars spin off the track (nose heavy 54% frt-46% rr), while the old track pack 5.0 runs a hair faster. BOSS beating road course my ARSE,…. These Ford idiots at FMC need to really shut up or leave Ford. Dodge and Chevy are truly turning up the heat, while ford is just about the looks. It’s like Ford got paid off to tone down the car and sit this one out in terms of performance. The others had bailouts, Ford didn’t. An now a dodge chally RT has the 6.4 V8 and Camaro SS still kicks 5.0 but. Don’t need a SRT8 for the fastest sub-50k car now, it’s a RT and it’s 485hp. No those are not real Hemis either. Not even 1% of 1%…