The IIHS started crash testing the Mustang in 2010 and it achieved "Good" scores for the moderate front overlap crash and for its headrests, but "Acceptable" for the side impact - scores that applied throughout the car's production run. The convertible was never tested according to the post-2011 criteria. The 2012 Mustang's scores dropped to four stars for everything except the five-star rollover test under the new stricter NHTSA testing criteria, which is still a decent result. The convertible was tested for the first time for the 2008 model year too, getting 5/5 for everything. Safety was improved and by 2008, the driver's side impact scored 5/5 and the passenger side 4/5. However, the 5th generation Mustang was not at all bad when it was launched and the NHTSA awarded it five stars overall according to 2005's less strict safety standards, with only the side impact getting four stars. When buying second-hand cars, it always pays to remember that safety standards keep advancing and you won't be getting the same standard of protection that new cars provide. However, the 5.0-liter V8 uses more or less the same fuel as its 4.6-liter predecessor and offers far more power too, so the improvements all around are impressive. It's definitely the one to go for in terms of an unbeatable performance-to-economy ratio. The new V6 that came in 2011 is excellent and for less fuel than its predecessor, it offers the same performance as the first version of the V8. However, so does the 4.6-liter V8 and the difference between the two is not sufficient to recommend the V6. The Ford Mustang S-197 fifth generation does a reasonable job of matching its EPA figures and the base 4.0-liter V6 it launched with does seem to easily improve on its estimates in the real world, even if it's an uninspiring engine otherwise. These figures are submitted by the public and the EPA has little control over how they are obtained, but they do give an indication of what a car is capable of. Therefore, the EPA gathers fuel-consumption data from motorists on the cars they drive and publishes it alongside the official EPA figures, once enough data is available on a model to arrive at a reasonable average. The EPA-estimated fuel-consumption figures for cars can often be somewhat optimistic and not always easy to match in the real world. It received the same choice of six-speed transmissions at the same time. This move aged the 4.6-liter V8 overnight and prompted a five-liter version to replace it - developing a stonking 412 hp and 390 lb-ft of torque, putting clear daylight between it and the V6 once again.
.jpg "2005 mustang 4.0 testing fuel pump driver module")
#2005 MUSTANG 4.0 TESTING FUEL PUMP DRIVER MODULE MANUAL#
The transmission was now a six-speed, regardless of whether you chose the manual or automatic.
.jpg "2005 mustang 4.0 testing fuel pump driver module")
Ford finally realized that the situation was becoming untenable and fixed it for the 2011 model year by replacing the outdated V6 lump with a new 3.7-liter Cyclone V6 producing a vastly superior 305 hp - 5 hp more than the V8 at the Mustang's launch in 2005 - and 280 lb-ft of torque. The 2010 facelift introduced fresh styling and a power boost for the Modular V8 to 315 hp and 325 lb-ft, but the coarse, thirsty Cologne V6 soldiered on unchanged. All trims could be specified with a five-speed manual or five-speed automatic transmission driving the rear wheels, naturally, via a live axle. The GT Deluxe and GT Premium trims get the far more powerful naturally aspirated 4.6-liter Ford Modular V8, packing 300 hp and 320 lb-ft of torque. It powers the V6 Deluxe and V6 Premium trims. The base engine in the 2005 Mustang 5th gen is the ancient naturally aspirated 4.0-liter Cologne V6 developing a mere 210 hp and 240 lb-ft of torque.
0 kommentar(er)
