Is that IRS on that 2010 Mustang??

[suv_guy_19]

Oh, and according to the exchange rates I just looked up....

 

$1 USD = 1.1094 AUD

$1 USD = 1.0005 CAD

 

So it would cost more to build and ship a $30k Commodore from Australia than it would to build (and not have to ship) a Camaro in Canada.

 

 

You'd better rethink that. The Canadian dollar is worth MORE than the Aussie dollar. What you just posted shows that.

Edited February 11, 2008 by suv_guy_19

[eddiehaskell]

You'd better rethink that. The Canadian dollar is worth MORE than the Aussie dollar. What you just posted shows that.

You're right (the Australian dollar and Canadian are close), but how much does it cost to ship a Commodore in from Australia? A Camaro built in Canada is basically already here.

 

The distance from Australia to the US is around 7500 miles...I imagine shipping cost on a 3900lb Commodore ain't cheap!!

Edited February 11, 2008 by eddiehaskell

[TomServo92]

You're right (the Australian dollar and Canadian are close), but how much does it cost to ship a Commodore in from Australia? A Camaro built in Canada is basically already here.

 

The distance from Australia to the US is around 7500 miles...I imagine shipping cost on a 3900lb Commodore ain't cheap!!

 

Oh boy! Now we're "financial magazine" racing! :P

[Blueblood]

The 05+ Mustangs handle really good, their biggest limitation is the shitty tires Ford puts on them, with nothing but a tire swap they will whip a lot of Euro cars costing much much more, guess you gotta experience it to know. Anybody that knows anything about the Griggs Mustangs knows how well a solid axle car can handle, the new Mustangs use a similar set-up, panhard bar/3-link. Plus the front suspension geometry is vastly improved over the Fox chassis, and it has nearly 50/50 weight balance. I've driven one on a race track and I was blown away at how good it handles, at the limit it would lose traction in a totally nuetral fashion as the cheap tires lost grip, the Grand Am Mustangs have been kicking ass all over BMW's and Porsches on the race track with the solid axle.

 

The people bashing it's handling have not driven one, period.

 

I'm hoping the 2010 has performance tires and a lower ride height, that will really show what the car is capable of. If they go with an IRS then the CBS that JPD posted is the ticket, shouldn't be any more expensive or heavy then the solid axle.

Edited February 11, 2008 by Blueblood

[eddiehaskell]

How many buyers will the Mustang lose by going to IRS vs how many will it gain/retain. That is what Ford has to decide.

 

I believe IRS would open up the Mustang market to people who wouldn't otherwise buy a Mustang.

 

For those drag racers that get mad....what are they going to buy instead? Camaro? Opps, that's IRS. Challenger? Opps, that's IRS. Imports? Opps, all of those are IRS.

 

So drag racers will either buy old cars or get over it and make the IRS work/swap in a 8.8.

Edited February 11, 2008 by eddiehaskell

[SVT_MAN]

How many buyers will the Mustang lose by going to IRS vs how many will it gain/retain. That is what Ford has to decide.

 

I believe IRS would open up the Mustang market to people who wouldn't otherwise buy a Mustang.

 

For those drag racers that get mad....what are they going to buy instead? Camaro? Opps, that's IRS. Challenger? Opps, that's IRS. Imports? Opps, all of those are IRS.

 

So drag racers will either buy old cars or get over it and make the IRS work/swap in a 8.8.

 

It isn't often that I'd say Eddie Haskell is right, but in this case, well, I think that we're going to leave it to Beaver and say he is :P

 

As I've said before it's much ado about nothing, the SRA rides and handles very well 99% of the time....it's only the rare turn AND bump where you'll notice it.

 

 

In the Mustang's case, you do "what enthusiasts ask for" or at least the legends of Mustang buyers. Remember the Probe? It was to be the Mustang replacement way back when....they can be a VERY vocal group! It (the drag racing stuff) may have been a bit of spin too....the cheaper more durable SRA may have been all that was available here in 05, vs importing the Aussie IRS.

 

I notice that you are living in San Diego, CA. You guys have pretty nice roads there from what I hear. Bump + Curve isn't uncommon here at all, and every time I hit one in my Mustang, I am reminded that I have a live axle back there. Don't get me wrong, I love the car - but I'd much rather have an independent rear. Come visit the rust belt sometime. We have terrible roads because of our harsh winters. (We just got 14" of snow this past Wednesday and now it is -10 degrees as I speak.)

Edited February 11, 2008 by SVT_MAN

[wescoent]

Weight spiraled out of control? Where did GM say that? I'm sure they knew 3-4 years ago what the zeta platform would weigh.

 

Where did they ever say 300hp was the original intent?

 

The Mustang had 300hp in 2005 and GM's intent was to give the '09/'10 Camaro only 300hp to match the '05 Mustang? Unless they somehow thought the Mustang would never get a power increase, I don't think so.

I'm sure they knew 3-4 years ago what the zeta platform would weigh. Why would the car need 430hp to keep up with a ~340-350hp Mustang??? It's not 1000lbs heavier than the Mustang. It'll likely be 200-300lbs heavier MAX (if the Mustang gets IRS probably closer to 200lbs). An extra 20hp with more displacement (torque) would easily offset that. Hmm, the 362hp L98 seems perfect.

Impala and Lucerne were dropped and the G8 which is made in Australia and shipped to the US is still under $30k. I seriously doubt making new body panels and interior is going to drive the price well above $30k. If anything, selling 100k Camaros will drive the cost to produce zeta cars down.

I'd say the DI V6 cost more to produce than the L98 or LS3.

 

I say LS3 or L98 Z28 for $29-30k (about $2-3k more than the Mustang) and around $42-$45 for the SS with maybe the 550hp CTS-V engine. Unless GM plans to produce only about 15-20k units per year, they know they'll have to meet the price points of the Mustang.

 

100k Camaros? I'd say 40,000-50,000 total is an optimistic appraisal of the situation. The Mustang is selling, ballpark, maybe 100k-120k right now, and they own the entire pony car market plus some rental sales to pad the figures. With the Challenger and Camaro both hitting the market, combined with high fuel prices, I cannot see anyone in that group breaking 70-80k sales from here on out, and we all know the Mustang owns this market. I just don't know where GM expects to magically get all these sales from.

[CarShark]

100k Camaros? I'd say 40,000-50,000 total is an optimistic appraisal of the situation. The Mustang is selling, ballpark, maybe 100k-120k right now, and they own the entire pony car market plus some rental sales to pad the figures. With the Challenger and Camaro both hitting the market, combined with high fuel prices, I cannot see anyone in that group breaking 70-80k sales from here on out, and we all know the Mustang owns this market. I just don't know where GM expects to magically get all these sales from.

Maybe they are counting on "die hard" Chevy buyers to buy them. There was quite an outcry when the Camaro was canceled in 2002, so there might be some pent-up demand. Of course, gas was hovering at $1.40 a gallon then (Automotive Digest), so that could very well throw a wrench into GM's plans. I'm noticing that Dodge is also hurrying along the intros of the smaller V-8 and V-6 versions of their muscle car, which leads me to believe that they want to get those going as well. I know a comparison of a 250 hp Challenger, 268 hp Camaro, and 265 hp Mustang isn't exactly the stuff Car and Driver covers are made of, but arguably it's the most important. You get the looks and some of the performance without the huge fuel bill. Who knows how direct injection will liven things up, as well? Edited February 11, 2008 by CarShark

[eddiehaskell]

100k Camaros? I'd say 40,000-50,000 total is an optimistic appraisal of the situation. The Mustang is selling, ballpark, maybe 100k-120k right now, and they own the entire pony car market plus some rental sales to pad the figures. With the Challenger and Camaro both hitting the market, combined with high fuel prices, I cannot see anyone in that group breaking 70-80k sales from here on out, and we all know the Mustang owns this market. I just don't know where GM expects to magically get all these sales from.

 

The Mustang is also on its 4th year with no changes. Go back to 2005 and Ford sold 161,000 Mustangs. In '09/'10 we will have a refreshed Mustang, new Camaro and new Challenger. With all 3 hitting the market, I can easily see the pony car market expanding to 220,000+ units.

 

Heck, look back as recently as 2001 - the Mustang and fbody combined for about 230,000 units. And that's with the slow selling 4th gen fbody on its death bed. In 2000 they combined for about 245,000.

[ebritt]

You do realize that the general consensus puts the Camaro V8 weight at around 3900lbs, right???

 

Is this what you envision for the next Mustang??

 

I have no problem with IRS being an option. However, just as some would have Mustangs loaded up with navigation, heated seats, rear seat entertainment, and AWD options............. there is a limit as to what makes a Mustang a Mustang. If it is an inexpensive, weight neutral option, then I am all for it.

 

AND the Camaro will cost about twice as much......keep it cheap!!!

[ebritt]

So let me see - the Pontiac G8 GT cost $29,995 with a 6 speed automatic and a good set of features (6 airbags, w/ full-length side curtain airbags, 18 inch alloy wheels, sports body kit, power-adjustable front seats, and a 7-speaker audio system with satellite radio system).

 

I wouldn't be surprised to see the Camaro V8 start at the same price or possibly $28,995 with the same features. The current base Mustang cost $27k, so a refreshed Mustang GT with a new engine and possibly IRS will likely be a $28,xxx - $29,000 car. That would put the Camaro and Mustang right in line with each other when it comes to pricing.

 

The "Base" Mustangs come in for a little over 20K.....there IS NO base model Camaro..they start at over 40K and after dealer greed could be near 50....

[eddiehaskell]

The "Base" Mustangs come in for a little over 20K.....there IS NO base model Camaro..they start at over 40K and after dealer greed could be near 50....

Maybe you're thinking of the Challenger.....the base V6 Camaro will likely be in the low 20s.

[Ford Jellymoulds]

Maybe they are counting on "die hard" Chevy buyers to buy them. There was quite an outcry when the Camaro was canceled in 2002, so there might be some pent-up demand. Of course, gas was hovering at $1.40 a gallon then (Automotive Digest), so that could very well throw a wrench into GM's plans. I'm noticing that Dodge is also hurrying along the intros of the smaller V-8 and V-6 versions of their muscle car, which leads me to believe that they want to get those going as well. I know a comparison of a 250 hp Challenger, 268 hp Camaro, and 265 hp Mustang isn't exactly the stuff Car and Driver covers are made of, but arguably it's the most important. You get the looks and some of the performance without the huge fuel bill. Who knows how direct injection will liven things up, as well?

 

I can remember Mini sales bumbling along at a low 22,000 a year worldwide as BL/Rover dealerships got axed by asset strippers BAE, they then rapped them in a simular way as Cerberus are doing to Chrysler at the moment. BMW bought Rover kept the Mini brand. Mini then had access to massive worldwide network of BMW dealerships to sell the new Mini's through, today the Mini's Cowley plant is the biggest producer of cars in the UK 200,000 per year and most are for export, the Mini can sell into any market even into fleet car rentals and still come up smelling of roses with out the excuses we can't do rentals. Mini hold their value like nothing else.

 

With gasoline stable at $91 a barrel and looking to move much higher by the end of the year, you have gotta ask the question why are Ford not looking to copy Dodge's example by using smaller more fuel efficient engines in the Mustang, and if Ford did it would open up a lot of doors worldwide for the Mustang to sell into, Ford have have a massive network of dealers worldwide to sell it through.

Ford have not sold a sports coupe muscle car in Europe for ages so there is already a sales black hole just waiting to be filled.

So if BMW can build the Mini from the most expensive manufacturing location in the world to build cars from why can't Ford do the same with the Mustang?

 

If Ford did put a smaller engine in the Mustang and try to sell it worldwide like the Mini, they might see sales increase to something like 400,000 a year, and at the same time making it more sellable in it's home market in the US as well. If Lincoln's went down the same road as this, it might make them more attactive to sell through Ford's massive worldwide network as well. Commonality of parts worlwide is another thing Alan Mulally mentioned he would like to see come in at Ford, this would also help Ford if they wanted to go global with some of its models.

Edited February 11, 2008 by Ford Jellymoulds

[jpd80]

Oh, and according to the exchange rates I just looked up....

 

$1 USD = 1.1094 AUD

$1 USD = 1.0005 CAD

 

So it would cost more to build and ship a $30k Commodore from Australia than it would to build (and not have to ship) a Camaro in Canada.

Especially when the $30,000 Pontiac G8 sells for AUS$45,000 in Australia as the Commodore SS-V.

Y'all is gettin' the bargain of the century!

[goinbroke2]

I can remember Mini sales bumbling along at a low 22,000 a year worldwide as BL/Rover dealerships got axed by asset strippers BAE, they then rapped them in a simular way as Cerberus are doing to Chrysler at the moment. BMW bought Rover kept the Mini brand. Mini then had access to massive worldwide network of BMW dealerships to sell the new Mini's through, today the Mini's Cowley plant is the biggest producer of cars in the UK 200,000 per year and most are for export, the Mini can sell into any market even into fleet car rentals and still come up smelling of roses with out the excuses we can't do rentals. Mini hold their value like nothing else.

 

With gasoline stable at $91 a barrel and looking to move much higher by the end of the year, you have gotta ask the question why are Ford not looking to copy Dodge's example by using smaller more fuel efficient engines in the Mustang, and if Ford did it would open up a lot of doors worldwide for the Mustang to sell into, Ford have have a massive network of dealers worldwide to sell it through.

Ford have not sold a sports coupe muscle car in Europe for ages so there is already a sales black hole just waiting to be filled.

So if BMW can build the Mini from the most expensive manufacturing location in the world to build cars from why can't Ford do the same with the Mustang?

 

If Ford did put a smaller engine in the Mustang and try to sell it worldwide like the Mini, they might see sales increase to something like 400,000 a year, and at the same time making it more sellable in it's home market in the US as well. If Lincoln's went down the same road as this, it might make them more attactive to sell through Ford's massive worldwide network as well. Commonality of parts worlwide is another thing Alan Mulally mentioned he would like to see come in at Ford, this would also help Ford if they wanted to go global with some of its models.

 

Oh man, some of you guys just don't get it. Yes you could put in a tiny 4cyl that gets great milage and irs so it handles, hell, make it front wheel drive and weigh 2100lb's and wow what a great little sports car you'd have....BUT IT WOULD NOT BE A MUSTANG!!!!

 

Anybody remember the PROBE?

 

Stop trying to outthink what works. Face facts, the mustang is what it is. If you don't like it or don't like what it stands for then you obviously won't be buying one. (and probably never have)

Don't try to conform it into what you think would make a nice sporty car.

 

Myself, I think the fox bodies were one of the best things Ford ever did. Why? Because it was relatively light, cheap(as in price not quality) and because of the long production run and many vehicles off the platform, it was cheap to build aftermarket parts for. (ie excellent hot rod material)

THAT is what a mustang is!! Something everybody can go fast and have fun and not cost a fortune. Where do you think fun ford weekends came from? (note they centre on DRAGRACING) A lot of $$ has been made from the revival of the mustang in the 80's. Everything from aftermarket body kits to massive amounts of 302 parts/blowers/heads/ets. Go to any dragstrip and you can see mustangs running SBC because the platform is so good even chevy guys run it.

Why does the mustang have such a huge following? It's NOT because the "sporty types" like it or the "rallye guys". It was a car that a girl going to college could drive with a 4cyl and a new couple could have a 6 and a person who wanted some power could have a v8. Everybody could relate and modify it to suit their taste. Now you guys want it bloated out with 15 airbags/nav sys/back up camera/irs/diesel/awd/paddle shift/more sound deadener/bigger stereo/blah/blah/blah/kitchen sink/blah/blah.

 

IT'S A MUSTANG! PERIOD! It's been selling since before any other pony car, and since any other pony car stopped production. Perhaps the long hood/short trunk/affordable/v8/rwd/solid axle/man or auto tranny/fun to drive formula is right???????

 

 

PS, to those who think the wheel hopping cobra's with irs can dragrace? YOU'RE IDIOTS!!

THAT is why if anything other than a "quick pass" down the track is in order the glass rearend is chucked out and a solid axle is put in. Also, check IHRA or NHRA for the current rules on IRS. In Stock or SuperStock a live axle is allowed to replace an irs due to safety concerns. This was especially important when 427 corvettes where spewing parts all over the track and was a health hazard.

Edited February 11, 2008 by goinbroke2

[wescoent]

Ultimately, I think the Mustang, Camaro, and Challenger are going to be such overweight pigs, that none will fit the pony car description of light, cheap, fun. But, the people will want what the people want. Personally, I feel the overweight luxury coupe market could be better served by say, a Thunderbird, or a Monte Carlo, or a Charger.

 

I think IRS should be optional, as part of a GT package for both V6 and V8 versions.

[Ford Jellymoulds]

Oh man, some of you guys just don't get it. Yes you could put in a tiny 4cyl that gets great milage and irs so it handles, hell, make it front wheel drive and weigh 2100lb's and wow what a great little sports car you'd have....BUT IT WOULD NOT BE A MUSTANG!!!!

 

Anybody remember the PROBE?

 

Stop trying to outthink what works. Face facts, the mustang is what it is. If you don't like it or don't like what it stands for then you obviously won't be buying one. (and probably never have)

Don't try to conform it into what you think would make a nice sporty car.

 

Myself, I think the fox bodies were one of the best things Ford ever did. Why? Because it was relatively light, cheap(as in price not quality) and because of the long production run and many vehicles off the platform, it was cheap to build aftermarket parts for. (ie excellent hot rod material)

THAT is what a mustang is!! Something everybody can go fast and have fun and not cost a fortune. Where do you think fun ford weekends came from? (note they centre on DRAGRACING) A lot of $$ has been made from the revival of the mustang in the 80's. Everything from aftermarket body kits to massive amounts of 302 parts/blowers/heads/ets. Go to any dragstrip and you can see mustangs running SBC because the platform is so good even chevy guys run it.

Why does the mustang have such a huge following? It's NOT because the "sporty types" like it or the "rallye guys". It was a car that a girl going to college could drive with a 4cyl and a new couple could have a 6 and a person who wanted some power could have a v8. Everybody could relate and modify it to suit their taste. Now you guys want it bloated out with 15 airbags/nav sys/back up camera/irs/diesel/awd/paddle shift/more sound deadener/bigger stereo/blah/blah/blah/kitchen sink/blah/blah.

 

IT'S A MUSTANG! PERIOD! It's been selling since before any other pony car, and since any other pony car stopped production. Perhaps the long hood/short trunk/affordable/v8/rwd/solid axle/man or auto tranny/fun to drive formula is right???????

 

 

PS, to those who think the wheel hopping cobra's with irs can dragrace? YOU'RE IDIOTS!!

THAT is why if anything other than a "quick pass" down the track is in order the glass rearend is chucked out and a solid axle is put in. Also, check IHRA or NHRA for the current rules on IRS. In Stock or SuperStock a live axle is allowed to replace an irs due to safety concerns. This was especially important when 427 corvettes where spewing parts all over the track and was a health hazard.

Nobody has mentioned 4 cylinders apart from you, and l agree with you the PROBE like the PUMA were both souless SHIT and were both massive sales flops in Europe. the Capri which was based on the Mustang was not. A V6 Mustang with a smaller engine would not flop in Europe, it's just that the rest of the world apart from the Middle East & Russia could not fill up V8 Mustang. What wrong selling selling it worldwide, if sales keep slipping in the US they might end up killing it off all together as fuel price start rise to $150 by the end of the year as the Chinese and Indian start tapping into our oil supplies in their billions as they get mobile for the first time. The rules of supply and demand will send price of fuel through the roof in the next few years.

[jpd80]

I think for Europe, a Mustang fitted with:

- a small DI AJ V8, either 3.9 or 4.2 (320 hp)

- 6-speed manual gearbox

- Control Blade IRS

 

Small Techno V8 engine, lots of revs, lots of gears, - perfect for Euro tastes!

[Ford Jellymoulds]

I think for Europe, a Mustang fitted with:

- a small DI AJ V8, either 3.9 or 4.2 (320 hp)

- 6-speed manual gearbox

- Control Blade IRS

 

Small Techno V8 engine, lots of revs, lots of gears, - perfect for Euro tastes!

 

It sounds great to me JPD l would love one & buy it, but to be honest with at fuel at $10 a gallon in the UK not many folk could afford to run one, but they could afford to buy it. It would be all about getting the balance right 3.0 absolute max even then it's going to struggle meet coming Co2 EU laws in the future. Maybe a turbocharged low Co2 diesel like Audi R8 diesel would be the only around the emmisions problem it's hard.

[wescoent]

What's the problem with a 1.8L 250hp Ecoboost for the Mustang? We're talking about a mid 6-second car here... not slow by ANYONE's standards.

[goinbroke2]

I think for Europe, a Mustang fitted with:

- a small DI AJ V8, either 3.9 or 4.2 (320 hp)

- 6-speed manual gearbox

- Control Blade IRS

 

Small Techno V8 engine, lots of revs, lots of gears, - perfect for Euro tastes!

 

You want it? GREAT, build it, but DON'T CALL IT A MUSTANG!!!

I lived in germany for 8 years, yes I know europeans like pissy little sewing machine engines that rev to the moon and run at 7000 all day long. Good for them. That is not a mustang though.

 

Basically, you want a euro car with euro styling/taste/temperment but stick an extremely popular name on it to use the names equity.

 

And for this comment;

"if sales keep slipping in the US they might end up killing it off all together as fuel price start rise to $150 by the end of the year as the Chinese and Indian start tapping into our oil supplies in their billions as they get mobile for the first time"

 

Just by making that comment, completely detracts any semblance of knowledge of the mustang or it's history/heritage that you might have been perceived to have had.

No ford won't discontinue the mustang because gas goes to $150.00 a barrel.

[wescoent]

If anyone here knows Mustang history, they'll back me up in saying the Mustang was meant to bring stylish European GT cars to the masses. Long hood, short deck, compact proportions, and such.

 

I would have no problem if the Mustang could be equipped with a small Ecoboost engine (1.8L, 250hp sounds good) and optional IRS. The Mustang has always been about CHOICE. As long as Jim Bob from Nashville can get his 6.2L Boss Mustang with a solid rear axle at a decent price, what's wrong with Laurent from Paris buying a 1.8L IRS Mustang with all the same American style and swagger? It's the same car, just with a smaller displacement engine and a new rear suspension. And Laurent's Mustang will wipe the floor with Jim Bob's cousin's 1996 Ford Mustang GT V8 all day long... does that make the 96 model any less Mustang?

 

If you have no problem with hairdressers and executive assistants going to the mall in white Mustang V6 convertibles with their girlfriends, why can't American-loving Europeans get a Mustang too, without needing to get raped by European regulations that hate large displacement engines? Are their Euros any less valuable than our dollars for Ford?

[goinbroke2]

What's the problem with a 1.8L 250hp Ecoboost for the Mustang? We're talking about a mid 6-second car here... not slow by ANYONE's standards.

 

I think it's a great idea, as long as the weight comes down to 2800-3000lb's though. Make it the bare bones base model with a v6 as mid grade and the v8 on the top? PERFECT!

Then in 10 years time when somebody wants a car to cheaply modify to race (drag/slalom/stockcar/whatever) the millions of cheap 4cyl mustangs on lots will be scooped up like the once undesirable 4cyl notchback's are now.

[silvrsvt]

I think it's a great idea, as long as the weight comes down to 2800-3000lb's though. Make it the bare bones base model with a v6 as mid grade and the v8 on the top? PERFECT!

 

In all seriousness, do you seriously think that the Mustang can shed nearly 500lbs of weight from it? The only way to do that is to make it the same size a Focus or Verve, but then again you'll be left with just a Verve or a Focus to drive to do so.

 

Unless someone finds a cheap way to make cars out of Aluminum or other lightweight materials, cars are going to hover around the same weights they are now, and I think asking Ford to cut 25% of the current curb weight of the Mustang is a bridge too far, unless you want Focus sized/based Mustang.

 

Just look at the curb weights of its competitors and you'll see they aren't coming down anytime soon

[SVT_MAN]

The Mustang has always been, and hopefully will always be, about affordable performance. It isn't about what specific features the car has. If it was, people would have abandoned the car long ago when it began getting features like airbags, traction control, and ABS. The Mustang will never have the best and the most visible new luxury performance car features, but that doesn't mean it can't adopt pretty-much proven standards that are out there already. The whole wheel hop issue is only an issue to drag racers. Period.

 

If it is considered affordable and accessible to the masses, it doesn't matter what hardware is delivered underneath. An IRS, if it doesn't cost too much (and the Dana unit does not), could still bring affordable performance. If the Mustang stuck to its original plan and value, and nothing ever changed, the Mustang would be riding on leaf springs, bias ply tires, 14" inch wheels, carburated engine, etc ...

 

Change is inevitable. As I said before, if drag racers really want to use the Mustang as a drag racing platform, then they can either offer it with an optional SRA or drag racers can swap one in if it's so important. It definitely isn't a production feasibility problem to have an SRA as an option though. I mean, the GT-500 is built on the same line as the GT Mustang - they put an entirely different engine and body work on the car when it goes down the line. There is no reason why the Dana cannot be swapped in place of the SRA.

 

If wheel hop is so bad on IRS, and SRAs are so good, why do performance vehicles like the Nissan 350Z, the Mazda RX-8 and other Japanese sport offerings offer IRS? Maybe it's because they actually work. Now, the RX-8 doesn't have the kind of torque output the Mustang has, but the Nissan 350Z has quite a bit. In fact, I've seen people drag race Nissan 350Zs. The Mustang could compete with IMPORTS a lot better if it at least offered an IRS setup.

 

But, wait, let's keep it as an SRA. Let's stick to the same formula. I mean, it's always worked to have an SRA, why change it now? I mean, other cars that stuck to the same formula, like the Crown Victoria, well that always has sold well, so ... oh wait, nevermind. That car isn't selling well and hasn't changed much. Why? Because Ford never bothered bringing the thing into the 21st century. Yet, just like the Mustang, Crown Vics have a loyal following yelling, "DON'T CHANGE WHAT WORKS!" People who don't want changes are the same people who hold the car back in the future. You're the same people who make engineers lazy because they don't HAVE to find a way if no one asks for it. In a crowded marketplace, the Mustang will need more than a badge of a prancing pony on the grille.

Edited February 11, 2008 by SVT_MAN