2024 (S650) FORD MUSTANG ECOBOOST 2.3L // FIRST STOCK DYNO // PERFORMANCE PACK // EUROCOMPULSION 

Definitely, and you can feel it while driving on the road, it's a noticeable difference. The torque is more linear and smooth, especially in the midrange. They aren't dumping fuel as early in the rpm range as they did on the previous gen, and there's a bit more peak boost as well, so that may be contributing.

Me too!

I hear you, there's nothing quite like a V8 sound at full tilt! But Ford definitely didn't overlook this engine setup, even though it's technically the base model now. It's very solid and performs well.

Throw a turbo on the coyote and watch it make 150hp per liter

100 hp per liter ain’t shit and these numbers aren’t impressive by any means

@@GoGoggansGo compared to the CTR, GTI, and SI it is and cheaper 🤡🤡

@@GoGoggansGour mom takes it tough🤡

2021 Mach 1 owner here, Great explanation regarding your dyno specifics. Greg if you are interested in 4 cylinder Mustangs, the previous generations HPP Ecoboost with the 2.3L 330hp 350tq seems like a pretty cool car.

@ThomisticAmerican13FOX Thanks Thomas, we already have a 2018 and a 2024, I do like the cars. Our 2018 has quite a bit more power than stock, but it's Toby's job to talk about that when the time is right @@ThomisticAmerican13FOX

93 in turbo cars will always give better results, the hotter the climate the higher octane really as it is prone to pre-ignite with lower octane fuels

I'm sure Toby will dyno it on 93 so real data will be coming. My guess is that under high heat conditions 93 will be a little better but in normal temps, like 80F and below I doubt it will matter much .

Yes, as someone else mentioned, the hotter the climate and higher humidity, higher octane will always yield more knock protection and more consistent performance on a turbocharged car. Below 75F and the comparison will be only slightly different, but it definitely makes a difference in certain conditions. We will likely do some testing on 93 octane as well, but I always start tune development on 91 octane, as that is usually the minimum premium anyone has access to, and by doing this I can ensure it runs safely on the minimum required octane.

There's a link in the video description to our dyno database on our site. You can see the charts really big there if these are difficult to see in the video.

My personal opinion is yes. I think the S650 has a better base platform to build off for performance, and just superior drivability. It's fantastic to drive. I would say both the Ecoboost and the GT are better options than the V6 (overall, all things considered). You really cannot go wrong with either one. I wasn't expecting such a huge difference between my 2018 and the 2024, it was a bit surprising how much better the 2024 is. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the V6, it has its place, but worth upgrading? Definitely.

@@EUROCOMPULSION Now that we are 10 months on, have you learned whether that difference was changes to the engine hardware or software? I would be very interested to see how these two compare after both are given a comparable performance tune but stock otherwise.

No, I think that the car will perform just fine on 91, the primary issue is cooling. Front bumper is off and the intercooler just isn't large enough to handle what the car is truly capable of, similar to the previous generation. Keep the temps down, upgraded intercooler and all of sudden a whole new world of performance opens up, even on 91 octane. Didn't test Drag Strip mode for the dyno, because the majority of the changes in Drag Strip mode are down to throttle masking, drivability masking, and transmission characteristics. The car is faster in that mode over a series of gears and rpm ranges, not through a single gear pull like we would be doing on the dyno. You can expect the tuning parameters in Track mode to be similar to Drag mode, being familiar with the ECU and tuning, and the previous generation ecoboosts ECUs, that's how they have always done it and seem to be doing it on this generation as well. So a dyno of Drag Strip mode over a 1 gear pull would not have yielded anything much different than you see in track mode.

Those 4.5 numbers are a hoax. I'm seeing real world numbers on the OE tire more in the low 5's.

It's not a hoax I got 4.64 in my 24 EcoBoost I will post it soon but go to my page I have a video getting 4.72 ​@@michaelfried3123

First off, we didn't apply any loss corrections. The dyno reads the dissipation (drive train loss) for a given gear, and applies the correction it detects at any given moment. We explained that in the video, but what you're seeing is what the dyno detected. Secondly, drivetrain loss is not necessarily a fixed # across the power band (I don't know if people know this or not). Dissipation is linear in nature, and dependent upon the gear, rpm/speed/load, and the amount of power generated at a given rpm/moment in the powerband. A peak drivetrain loss happens near peak power and near the upper part of the powerband, depending on gear and speed. At a lower rpm/speed, the dissipation is not as high (for example, where you would see peak torque occurring or just before). The dyno detects and measures the resistance through the powertrain going from redline back to below the starting rpm for the dyno run. Resistance/dissipation is less at that point in the power band. Again, mentioned in the video, this is why we don't solely go off of the flywheel hp data. There are too many variables involved, it's only a small part of the bigger picture. We only show them at the end so everyone else can see them. EDIT: Look at the WHP charts in the video, the lines at the bottom show the dissipation reading throughout the run.

Yes, it does. And they work well (shifting is faster and better than the previous gen 10speed cars).

No

Honestly, I haven't paid attention to that at all. I will check and see the next time we fill up.

If you talking about fuel economy is the same I have a 2023 before and now 2024 my new is making 21 by gallons with only 350 miles in odometer, my old 2023 mark 22.3 miles by gallons .

@@Hersses-tech I have noticed that the 2024 runs a bit richer for longer across the middle to top end of the powerband.

No extra power in Drag mode (not anymore than would be in Track mode), which is why we didn't publish that test. The Drag mode changes have more to do with throttle response and shift mapping, steering, torque reserve, etc. No real changes to peak torque and power for the purposes of this kind of testing. Now if we were at the drag strip, it's possible drag mode would produce the best results because of the changes outlined.

​@EUROCOMPULSION Every time I've run my 2020 or 2021 Ecoboost in drag mode, I've never gotten good results. Just straight sport mode with traction control off has always been given me the best. Any reason why? I'd say I'm no expert in drag racing lol. And it's just a brand new perfectly flat side street im driving on.

Well they've got the GT for that.

so original lol

Your mom is calling you kid, shut off your xbox and wash up!

Thank you for taking the time to comment and tell us your thoughts 🙃

Style is subjective, and nobody ever claimed the Mustang EB is a muscle car. If you like 200 less pounds on the nose for better handling, yet appreciate the strong S550/S650 chassis…

Muscle is in the exterior style first and foremost imo. The rest about cars is just so damn hard to objectify. They have V8s in NON-muscle cars all over, so that's not a great way to value it.

These cars run the quarter mile in the 13's bone stock. For comparison, the 289 HiPo only did 15's, and in a car that weighed in at 500 lbs less. Just something to think about before you say this is no muscle car.