Steveottawa Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 As someone who (like many here) lived through the early 1980's resurgence of the Mustang (I had the 82 GT with T-Bar and 5-Speed) vs Camaro magazine wars and followed it into the 1990's when the cars really started to suck - and suck real bad - all I can say is that it is great to see both GM and F and C bringing us some incredible cars - which our children will know is/was the pinnacle of gasoline cars - before we all go green one day. They each have classic muscle cars right now, and it doesn't matter who is 0.5 seconds faster. They're all stupid fast - and 0.5 seconds faster will NOT be the reason why some are collectibles in 30 years. It will be because they use a fuel which you'll probably need a special polluters license to buy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 The rivalry keeps business going in Motown. I dont care what magazines say, but if there was no rival, there'd only be CUV's for sale at Ford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coupe3w Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 It's why we've organized under Ford Performance,” Pericak said. “We don't just race to race. We race to perform. And what does that really mean? It means that we're going to use the race track as a test track to prove our technologies and innovations so that we can put them into our cars and into the showroom. "It's really important to our company to celebrate 50 years and really demonstrate our engineering prowess inside the company,” he said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 (edited) The rivalry keeps business going in Motown. I dont care what magazines say, but if there was no rival, there'd only be CUV's for sale at Ford. Oh, you mean like when the Camaro was absent for quite a few years several years back and the Mustang still kept going and selling well? Edited November 24, 2015 by fordmantpw 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 (edited) The rivalry keeps business going in Motown. I dont care what magazines say, but if there was no rival, there'd only be CUV's for sale at Ford. Ford kept producing the Mustang without a Camaro or Challenger competitor. Edit: (guess I should have read the last post before replying) Edited November 24, 2015 by akirby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 Hmm, you got me there, but then GM still had the Corvette all this time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 (edited) seems to me, and I believe Ford will be addressing the fact, all the Mustang needs is weight loss....the Coyote has more potential for sure...but as Akirby says, its not really lacking right now...so, a couple hundred pounds and voila, game back on, and maybe they should have a Performance Pack AND a track pack for the regular Mustang , with the track pack aimed at the Camaro head on...The PP is right now a nice compromise between performance and daily driving..something the SS owners lose sight of as its all about chest bumping.... Edited November 24, 2015 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 Weight is a reflection of engineering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 That'd mean more if Colin Chapman's car company was now the world's largest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 The PP is right now a nice compromise between performance and daily driving..something the SS owners lose sight of as its all about chest bumping.... Precisely. And it doesn't make you cringe when you look at it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 Weight is a reflection of engineering. No. Weight is a reflection of the materials used for a given job. I would say weight is much more a reflection of cost than it is engineering. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 No. Weight is a reflection of the materials used for a given job. I would say weight is much more a reflection of cost than it is engineering. Eh, there's elements of both involved Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 The only engineering that saves weight is if you can design a smaller part. The rest comes from lighter material and smaller overall size. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 The only engineering that saves weight is if you can design a smaller part. The rest comes from lighter material and smaller overall size. There's still a lot of engineering work that goes into using the lighter materials to account for the different properties of said material. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 There's still a lot of engineering work that goes into using the lighter materials to account for the different properties of said material. Definitely, but if you can't afford those lighter materials, there's no point in engineering the parts to begin with. Just think what the engineers could do on a Mustang if they didn't have to be held to a 'normal' price point. Reference the 2017 Ford GT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 There's still a lot of engineering work that goes into using the lighter materials to account for the different properties of said material. But the weight savings still comes from the material not the engineering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 But the weight savings still comes from the material not the engineering.I'm not an engineer, but I have friends and family that are. There are sometimes hidden tricks that can save weight, sometimes without using different materials. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 Just think what the engineers could do on a Mustang if they didn't have to be held to a 'normal' price point. Reference the 2017 Ford GT. They would probably design a GT350. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
30 OTT 6 Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 But the weight savings still comes from the material not the engineering. A lot of weight reduction can come from engineering design. Material can be added to certain areas of a part or frame where stress is greater and removed or thinned where stresses are light or non-existent. This type of engineering occurs frequently with hydro-formed steel frames, for example. All the analysis work required to design such a part is pure engineering and it costs a lot of money. That's why I think S550 ran out of money for weight reduction. They had to pump money into other priority areas like a new body and interior, and a new chassis, which may or may not be used on any other vehicle. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coupe3w Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 A lot of weight reduction can come from engineering design. Material can be added to certain areas of a part or frame where stress is greater and removed or thinned where stresses are light or non-existent. This type of engineering occurs frequently with hydro-formed steel frames, for example. All the analysis work required to design such a part is pure engineering and it costs a lot of money. That's why I think S550 ran out of money for weight reduction. They had to pump money into other priority areas like a new body and interior, and a new chassis, which may or may not be used on any other vehicle. I agree. Plenty of engineering goes into making parts lighter. And that does cost money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 I'm not an engineer, but I have friends and family that are. There are sometimes hidden tricks that can save weight, sometimes without using different materials. I already acknowledged that, but you're talking about a few pounds here or there. You're not going to "engineer" a 300 lb weight loss without using carbon fiber or other lightweight materials and/or making it somewhat smaller. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 You're not going to "engineer" a 300 lb weight loss without using carbon fiber or other lightweight materials and/or making it somewhat smaller. Bingo! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
traxiii Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) I already acknowledged that, but you're talking about a few pounds here or there. You're not going to "engineer" a 300 lb weight loss without using carbon fiber or other lightweight materials and/or making it somewhat smaller. That is the key with the new Camaro and its weight savings, it is now quite a bit smaller than Mustang. Edited November 25, 2015 by traxiii Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) Well, it's not really smaller than the Mustang. It weighs about as much as the Mustang and is about the same size as the Mustang (identical length 188.3, width: 74.7 vs. 75.4 on the Mustang). The Zeta Camaro was bigger and heavier. Given two vehicles with similar programs & cost parameters, one shouldn't be surprised that the weights are so similar. Edited November 25, 2015 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 meh, theres weight savings to be had...counterpoint is at what costs before the bean counters get their knickers in a twist....good set of wheels can have substantial weight savings...but obviously that and utilizing lighter materials ( alum rear diff housing, lighter driveshafts, etc etc ) would crate havoc for the cost vs benefits accountants...fact is though, feature for feature the Mustange enjoys an MSRP advantage....do you give that up ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.