Auto blog

Martini Mustang is a 'what if moment' gone right

Feast your eyes on a masterpiece. This is Steve Strope's Ford Mustang in the classic fastback bodystyle, and as you'll notice, it sports the signature colors of Martini Racing, a livery that's as legendary as any Gulf Racing-styled car. But the red, white and blues of the Martini stripe down this Mustang's middle tell only a very small part of the story, in the latest video from Petrolicious.
What would you guess is under the hood? A 289-cubic-inch V8? Maybe a 302, or some absurd Ford crate engine? Maybe Strope went all Tokyo Drift - he's actually responsible for the "Hammer" Plymouth Satellite driven by Vin Diesel at the end of the movie - and found an RB26DETT to drop into the pony car? You'd be wrong on all counts.
This mad, mad man somehow finagled a Ford-Lotus engine from a 1966 Indianapolis 500 car into the Mustang's engine bay. Yes, a Mustang with an engine designed for a 160-mile-per-hour, open-wheel racecar. That's like someone in 40 years dropping McLaren's 2.4-liter V8 from the MP4-28 into a Scion FR-S. It'd just make a monster.

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.

Submit your questions for Autoblog Podcast #324 LIVE!

We're set to record Autoblog Podcast #324 tonight, and our friend Peter Leung (a.k.a. BaronVonClutch), who writes about racing for Richland F1 is going to teach us how to love the vroom-vroom. Drop us your questions and comments regarding the rest of the week's news via our Q&A module below. Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes if you haven't already done so, and if you want to take it all in live, tune in to our UStream (audio only) channel at 10:00 PM Eastern tonight.
Discussion Topics for Autoblog Podcast Episode #324
Geneva Motor Show highlights from Zach