Buying a car - considering Ford Mustang 5.0L...fuel economy?

[epp_b]

The thread title pretty much explains it all. I'm looking for a new car (well, not "new", but new for me ;)) and a mid-1980's - 1993 5.0L Mustang is on the list of cars I might buy.

Unfortunately, an all-too-important factor in today's car buying is fuel economy with gas prices as high as they are.

Now, obviously, it would be ridiculous for to consider a 5.0L Mustang if fuel economy was ultimately important (the first thing of ultimate importance to me, really, is good power and torque), but I also don't want to be stuck with a car that I need to spend a life saving's on for fuel.

So far, I've found 17/24 U.S. MPG City/Hwy, but these are manufacturers' claims and so forth, which are typically vague and innacurate.

Has anyone here run an economy test on a 5.0L Mustang of that era? What's you're driving style like?


P.S. Oh, and I'm new here, so, hi! :)

[mroseneder]

I had a 5.0L mustang with some mods. And it sucked more fuel them my Hemi Ram...

Even IF I kept my leg out of it.

And my Ram gets roughly 17 city, 26 highway..

[epp_b]

Thanks for the reply. I'd be looking for something without a whole bunch of modifications -- it's fast enough as it is!

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by epp_b
-- it's fast enough as it is!


Lol, there's no such thing. My friend has a `86 5.0 Capri (basically the same car) and he's getting 14 city, and 22 pure highway. He does have a lead foot though.

[epp_b]

Lol, there's no such thing.
Well, OK, fast enough for me right now. The fastest car I've driven (besides a 5.0L Capris) is my Dad's Nissan Maxima.

[schurchill39]

wow I didn't know fuel economy and 5.0L mustang could be used in the same sentence.

If fuel economy is something thats going to be important to you then just the word 5 litre should of scared you away. Maybe consider a turboed import or smaller litre DSM if you want something with some decent "get-up-and-go"

[SilverBoost]

Originally posted by schurchill39
wow I didn't know fuel economy and 5.0L mustang could be used in the same sentence.

If fuel economy is something thats going to be important to you then just the word 5 litre should of scared you away.


Took the words right out of my mouth.

[epp_b]

Well, the incredible torque that a 5.0L has might just make up for the poor fuel economy ;)

[D. Dub]

Ya gotta pay to play :D

Besides a 5.0 L is the best bang for the buck you can get.

IMHO a 5.0 L litre driven sensibly isn't going to get much worse mileage than an econo car like a Honda thats bagged all the time.

[epp_b]

Ya gotta pay to play
Good point ;)


IMHO a 5.0 L litre driven sensibly isn't going to get much worse mileage than an econo car like a Honda thats bagged all the time.
Is that a guess or personal experience?

[QuasarCav]

Originally posted by D. Dub
Ya gotta pay to play :D

Besides a 5.0 L is the best bang for the buck you can get.

IMHO a 5.0 L litre driven sensibly isn't going to get much worse mileage than an econo car like a Honda thats bagged all the time.


I can bag, bag, bag my way to 24MPG at the very worst (WOT all the time and redline shifts).

[D. Dub]

Which is about the mileage you'd get from a 5.0 with a light foot.

[canadian_hustla]

I just sold my 1995 Mustang GT (302 engine), it was an absolute gas guzzler. No lies, I would get something like 310km per tank of $60.00

like someone said above, you have to pay to play

[epp_b]

Alright, well, thanks for all the help guys. I have an idea about it now, so I'll have to think about it and measure my options.

Thanks!

[dinglenuts]

on the other hand, my old co-worker had a 5.0L with some head work,exhaust,etc, and was driving to fort mac and back to calgary regularily. Another friend of mine did the same trip all the time with his late 90's protege' and the 5.0L was consistently getting better mileage.

[epp_b]

on the other hand, my old co-worker had a 5.0L with some head work,exhaust,etc, and was driving to fort mac and back to calgary regularily. Another friend of mine did the same trip all the time with his late 90's protege' and the 5.0L was consistently getting better mileage.
Hmm...fascinating!

[Moe Man]

its not that bad really, just dont bag on it..........sorry trick question, you cant help but bag on it.

and are you going to be driveing it in the winter?

[Darkane]

WTH is wrong with you people? 5L's get excellent economy! for god sakes most come with 2.73 gears! Ok original poster, I had an '86 Gt with 3.55 gears, cold air, cats gutted. WIth "MY" driving The best I got was 23.4MPG CITY driving. Over400km on the tank. I'd average 21-22 all the time. The trick with mustangs is this: SHIFT AT 1500RPM! THIS IS NOT A HIGH REVVING 4 CYL! Anyway ive gotten 27 on the highway. For godsakes my modded 350TA gets 17-19 CITY with 3.70gears. Shift low always in fifth when you can. even at 1100-1200 fifth is ok, to speed up downshift to 4th and barley touch the gas. then back to fifth.

I get over 40MPG with my civic all the time in the city.

[epp_b]

its not that bad really, just dont bag on it..........sorry trick question, you cant help but bag on it.
Well, the idea is that it has enough power to satisfy me without having to "bag it" all the time ;)


and are you going to be driveing it in the winter?
Yeah, I would need some good winter tires, that's for sure.


Shift low always in fifth when you can. even at 1100-1200 fifth is ok, to speed up downshift to 4th and barley touch the gas. then back to fifth.
I can believe that - the 5.0L has astonishing torque.

[HeavyD111]

I owned stock 87 and 89 5.0 5-speed coupes and they would get consistent mid to high 20's on the highway. City mpg wasn't great though...

[zain123]

you are trying to get with a hooker and you are worrying about std's ...
my buddy complains about his 3.8L v6 mustang.. so 5 L i can imagine would be a pain..

[epp_b]

you are trying to get with a hooker and you are worrying about std's ...

Ugh...that's one way to put it :nut:


my buddy complains about his 3.8L v6 mustang.. so 5 L i can imagine would be a pain..
Hmm...

[Toma]

My 700 hp, 9 second stang gets 22mpg city.

If a stock one gets worse mileage then this, the 02 sensors are pooched.