Ford Working on Radical New Mustang

[Biker16]

That's basically what's happened with 'loomnum. The big example was the AL-intensive Jag XJ redesign of a few years ago, when they went with aluminum pretty much everywhere they could (IIRC, even the unibody structure was 'loomnum), and the car still ended up being ~400lbs heavier than the model it replaced.

 

CF is alot different than LOOMINUM, It forces maker to movin to space frame designs, and unlike AL You can integrate CF into the unibody n areas where stregth is needed, without the corrsion issues of mixing steel and aluminum.

[RichardJensen]

the Solstice was an awesome car.

 

Which is why the Kappa platform is still in production right?

[akirby]

It's not THE reason but it's a great example of the mismanagement that led to it.

 

It wasn't a bad car - it was a terrible business decision. There was no market to support it and the money they invested in it (wasted) could have been spent to make a more competitive midsized sedan or other more mainstream vehicles.

 

Ditto the SSR, XLR, G8, etc. etc.

[twintornados]

All Ford needs to do is incorporate the "C" scoop into the styling on the flanks of the Evos and call it a day.....

[Moosetang]

Solstice praise and Solstice criticism, is it 8 years ago again? The idea of a small, Miata-fighting GM roadster was not terrible but the execution was wrong. They sunk a bunch of money in a platform with no scaling and no shared costs, the engine wasn't great, the convertible top SUCKED, fit and finish was often poor, and whatever it could have been it was bound to be nothing once it was rammed into the directionless Pontiac lineup.

Edited April 19, 2012 by Moosetang

[TomServo92]

it whatever it could have been it was bound to be nothing once it was rammed into the directionless Pontiac lineup.

 

Hey now! They also made a Saturn version....oh wait....

[akirby]

Hey now! They also made a Saturn version....oh wait....

 

And it was much better looking than the Pontiac version.

[NLPRacing]

 

 

And it was much better looking than the Pontiac version.

 

I always thought the Saturn Sky would of made a great looking Chevy as it already looked like a baby Corvette.

[TomServo92]

Do you guys remember forum member EddieHaskell? He used to go on and on about how the Kappas were proof that GM knew better than Ford. I wonder where he is now....

[RichardJensen]

Well, let's just say he complimented June's dress one time too many, and Ward took it the wrong way.

[jpd80]

Do you guys remember forum member EddieHaskell? He used to go on and on about how the Kappas were proof that GM knew better than Ford. I wonder where he is now....

 

You're looking at the inspiration for the rear drive architecture that will enable Cadillac to build a legitimate BMW 3 Series rival - and might underpin sporty compact rear drive cars for other GM divisions. The car shown here is the Holden Torana TT36, a concept developed by GM's Australian division and unveiled at the 2004 Sydney Motor Show.

 

 

 

Smaller than the Zeta-based Holden Commodore, the TT36 was built using hardware from the Pontiac Solstice's Kappa architecture. Holden boss Denny Mooney has made it quite clear a production version could be developed using Kappa components: "We were looking at that hardware as a potential base," he told the Sydney Morning Herald last year, "...to do a sedan off that. That's fundamentally what we'd do."

 

 

Scale clay models of the Torana TT36 concept, which was developed under the codename XP54, were shown to GM product czar Bob Lutz, design chief Ed Welburn and then North American engineering vice-president Jim Queen (now vp of global engineering) in February 2004. Mooney wanted GM to okay development of the TT36's "unique lower dominant structure" (i.e. platform), but the program was reportedly put on ice while the company diverted resources to rushing the GMT900 trucks and SUVs into production. Now it appears to have been given the green light.

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/future/112_070604_cadillac_bmw_fighter/#ixzz1sSsQpZ6x

[Sixt9coug]

Mustang will NOT get under 3000lbs again.

 

My 94 SN95 weighs 3,400 flat. All the CF in the world won't take 600lbs off of the weight of the new one while adding all the safety stuff, entertainment and other crap that mine lacks.

 

Yeah my 5.0L is all iron, but a dressed one weighs what? 450lbs? What does a Coyote weigh? I doubt that despite the aluminum construction, it's not that much lighter, of at all. DOHC heads are heavy no matter what they are made of.

[Moosetang]

Torona's "Kappa" components were very limited, as I understand it little beyond the front and rear suspension modules, hence the ATS and 6th gen Camaro using the "Alpha" for the platform and not "Kappa2" or somesuch.

[jpd80]

Torona's "Kappa" components were very limited, as I understand it little beyond the front and rear suspension modules, hence the ATS and 6th gen Camaro using the "Alpha" for the platform and not "Kappa2" or somesuch.

If you read carefully, you will see that it wasn't completely Kappa, the Chassis was a mix of parts that were partially developed

and Denny Mooney was seeking to have that platform fully developed but it was put on Ice..

 

That work was picked up by Cadillac (like Holden's Sigma) and called Alpha...

 

Torana concept was the size of BMW 3 series but had more like 5 Series interior space..

Edited April 19, 2012 by jpd80

[Moosetang]

I think we're saying the same thing at each other, just in different ways.

[jpd80]

I think we're saying the same thing at each other, just in different ways.

So frustrating that Holden begins/develops three RWd architectures but GMNA seems incapable of capitalizing on them.

I'm sure that Ford is talking much more closely with its remaining RWD cars and working on way to maximize scales of economy

through co-development of unseen parts where a sedan and coupe can share much without destroying each other's features.

I think Ford's execution of their RWD strategy will be much more coherent than GM's hodge podge of platforms..

 

If you're going to develop three unique vehicles, a coupe, a sedan and an SUV off a "common RWD architecture"

the smartest thing to do is look at all three vehicles first and work out where the changes must take place

to merge all three designs without spoiling the good features of the three derivatives...

Edited April 19, 2012 by jpd80

[twintornados]

Here are the GM product research experts, Maximum Bob Lutz and friend at the Ren Cen...circa 2004 (Bob Lutz charactor recreated by the ever talented and super creative Bullwinkle....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7mmrF-4rUE

Edited April 19, 2012 by twintornados

[Biker16]

Mustang will NOT get under 3000lbs again.

 

My 94 SN95 weighs 3,400 flat. All the CF in the world won't take 600lbs off of the weight of the new one while adding all the safety stuff, entertainment and other crap that mine lacks.

 

Yeah my 5.0L is all iron, but a dressed one weighs what? 450lbs? What does a Coyote weigh? I doubt that despite the aluminum construction, it's not that much lighter, of at all. DOHC heads are heavy no matter what they are made of.

 

the EB 1.6 is less than 200lbs

 

the current V6 car wieghs 3500lbs.

 

so thats 200 lbs. loss by using the 1.6.

 

the real weight saving would come from shrinking the car's footprint, more use of aluminum closure panels, (hood decklid, roof) Aluminum supsension pieces, and extensive use of HSSteel, UHSSteel, structural foam, light seats etc. it could be done.

 

the current car's HSS percentage is very low for a modern passenger car.

 

it is not imposible but it would be difficult to get it under 3000lbs.

[GTwannabe]

I think expecting a curb weight under 3000 lbs is purely wishful thinking. Even fox body GT's weighed more than that, and they had all the space and structural rigidity of a Pepsi can.

 

It's possible... the 4-banger Fox Mustangs weighed 2800lbs. That's with heavy iron motors, rear axles, steel driveshaft and control arms, etc.

[Mark B. Morrow]

I always thought the Saturn Sky would of made a great looking Chevy as it already looked like a baby Corvette.

 

I thought the Sky looked like a small Cadillac XLR.

[NickF1011]

It's possible... the 4-banger Fox Mustangs weighed 2800lbs. That's with heavy iron motors, rear axles, steel driveshaft and control arms, etc.

 

And my Cobra with an all-aluminum V8, tubular front suspension, and a handful of other weight-savers still tips the scales @ 3550. :shrug: And my '97 is still a flexy, cowl-shaking mess compared to a modern automobile. It's just very difficult to take out that weight, especially considering the added rigidity that needs to be built into the body for the mandatory convertible variant.

 

They could make a sub-3000 lb Mustang in the future two different ways:

 

Make it cheap and tiny.

Make it expensive but good.

 

I'm guessing Ford won't go for cheap and tiny, and they will need to remain conscious of the Mustang's creeping pricepoint.

Edited April 19, 2012 by NickF1011

[RichardJensen]

And, seriously, how much smaller can you make the Mustang? You think Ford's just *wasting space* with this thing? It's by far the lightest and most compact car in its class.

 

If you want to talk about shrinking the Camaro or Challenger, I'm all ears. Plenty of fat to cut there, but the Mustang? Don't let's be silly.

[NickF1011]

And, seriously, how much smaller can you make the Mustang? You think Ford's just *wasting space* with this thing? It's by far the lightest and most compact car in its class.

 

If you want to talk about shrinking the Camaro or Challenger, I'm all ears. Plenty of fat to cut there, but the Mustang? Don't let's be silly.

 

I personally wouldn't mind it it shrank back down to SN95 proportions, but I'm only 5'9" and not particularly wide in the midsection. One of the major gripes that always plagued the Fox & SN95 from the overall market though was interior room, something they finally addressed with the '05. I doubt they are going to regress in that regard.

[Biker16]

And, seriously, how much smaller can you make the Mustang? You think Ford's just *wasting space* with this thing? It's by far the lightest and most compact car in its class.

 

If you want to talk about shrinking the Camaro or Challenger, I'm all ears. Plenty of fat to cut there, but the Mustang? Don't let's be silly.

 

it is the lightest in a class of fat asses. that is not saying much.

 

The area the mustang could shrink is in it's huge ass. lob 10 inches off of it. now th car is 178 inches long.

 

Making the car more coke bottle shaped piching the nose, butt and midsection. but keeping the width, wheelbase and height the same.

[Edstock]

With collision regs being what they are, the width is probably not going to change, maybe 1" narrower, but side impact regs and big-butt North Americans means there is a limit to size reduction. IMHO, just keep the front overhang to a minimum.