It's MARGINALLY more efficient than an Aventador, which has a 6.5L V12 and weighs 3500lbs
>nobody cares about fuel economy in a supercar
True, but this car is basically an advertisement for Ecoboost. What is the point of giving a supercar a V6, calling it ecological, and then having V12 fuel economy? What a joke. If you're going to charge 400k for a car with an F-150 engine, at least make the engine impressive.
Bentley Richardson
Who cares, it's not like you or anyone else on this board will ever drive one.
It's fast and it looks cool, just leave it at that.
Ethan Hughes
It's actually impressive it gets that, that means it has a normal powerband and not just a crazy top end.
Dylan Kelly
By making it faster.
Elijah Perry
>$400,000 and a blowjob to fords executive board for an f150 with a bodykit what were they thinking?
Asher Myers
>giving a shit about fuel economy
YAWN
Levi Diaz
Wew they really need to work on thermal efficiency.
Levi Williams
>lifted 100% above ground clearance what's the point?
Sebastian Adams
more air in engine = more gas in the engine
Blake Diaz
off roadan muddan murrica
Jordan Turner
>literally a mall crawler
Wyatt Lee
>that articulation.
Owen Campbell
>what's the point?
what's the point of suspension lifting a DD and wrecking the ride quality when you can body lift to get the same thing but without the penalty on the road? Fuck offroading I just want to look good
Charles Thompson
>off roading >mudding
You've added 0 inches of ground clearance and made the rollover risk much worse
Joshua Carter
>hurr durr who gives a crap about MPG its a fast car
Ford fags in damage control.
I thought GM fags were butthurt but this kind of anal destruction blows my mind.
Tyler Sanders
it has nothing to do with the car and everything to do with the engine. the ecoboost motors have shit fuel economy across the board be it in their trucks, work vans, or I guess sports cars. it's a powerful engine man. there are sleeper plumbing vans casually strolling around right now sitting on a 400 lb/ft engines and probably don't even know it.
Cooper Peterson
yes keeping the engine warm sure would help fucking faggot
Aaron Bennett
>call it ecoboost >get 14 combined mpg madmen
Daniel Martin
snow drifts and plows
Jack Bailey
>people still don't understand how axles work Granted that is a brodozer, but take a minute to learn about suspension.
Parker Cox
[citation needed]
We don't even have hp numbers to go by, nevermind actual laptimes to actually compare and prove that it's faster than it's competition.
Connor Clark
>spoonfeed me mommy It's faster.
Dylan Ortiz
Remember when Clarkson sold his GT, because he couldn't DD it because of the appaling fuel economy? Several years later, add a lot of carbon fiber, an automatic gearbox, remove two cilinders and 1.9L of displacement, replace the supercharger with a set of turbo's - and it's worse? What the hell Ford.
>that means it has a normal powerband and not just a crazy top end. Hang on there, that's a bit premature to conclude. Modern turbo's for economy cars actually provide their torque shove right down low in the powerband - that's what improves their MPG ratings apparently. The GT's appaling fuel economy rating suggests that it might just lack that ''normal powerband''/ early torque shove, which might just mean that it does have a very peaky powerband.
Kevin Gray
>spoonfeed me I can't even spoonfeed myself if Ford refuses to publish numbers, or allow documented testing.
Elijah Jackson
i guess slapping a turbo, or making it a "hybrid" wasn't enough to cheat tests.
sometimes i feel like manufacturers forgot how to design engines. 15 -25 years ago nearly every manufacturers was trying design(copy) infinitely adjustable VVL/VVT and had some "tricks" like variable intakes, infamous dual spark plugs, lighter cams etc. i know it was expensive as fuck, but at least they were trying.
>How did Ford manage to make a sub-2900 pound car with a 3.5L V6 have worse fuel economy
