I frequent a few import boards, and every single enthusiast group was on the whole very excited about the new Mustang, until the news that there would be no IRS on the base and GT models. Most people, believe it or not, can't afford a Cobra. I was amazed at how fast and how thoroughly the opinion changed when everyone found out there would be no modern suspension. Mustang guys will still buy Mustangs, but Ford is missing out on a HUGE base of potential customers...customers who will instead buy a 350Z, G35C, GTO, STi, EVO, SRT-4, RX8, S2000, etc.
IRS poll
- Thread starter Zinc001
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
I am glad Ford stuck to it's roots and will be offering the GT with a solid rear. There are a lot of different opinions out there on what the Mustang should be. A few thoughts as I read through this thread:
1) The Mustang was and is an affordable sports car. It will be the cheapest 300 HP V8 on the road. An IRS adds cost to the car. Period.
2) The current solid axle rides fine. The next generation GT will ride even better. Yes, an IRS will ride better over bumps. Some people want technology for technology's sake. Take them for a ride in a car and tell them it's got an IRS, then listen to the rave reviews. Tell them it's got a solid axle, and they will nitpick the ride. There are several luxury cars out there with rides that will allow you to spread your Grey Poupon with ease as you cross the railroad tracks.
3) I could care less if a magazine editor ranks the 350Z over the new Mustang because the seats made his balls feel more comfy. If you are in love with the 350Z, buy it. Don't try and change the Mustang into an American version of the 350Z. I will choose the Mustang over the 350Z because of its power, styling, and heritage.
4) Lets compare apples with apples. People are talking about their Saturn that has an IRS. It is also slower than my riding lawnmower. Stick with performance cars in the same price range. The new GT is going to be less expensive than the 350Z. It is also going to be able to walk away from the 350Z in terms of acceleration.
5) I don't care if the import car crowd won't consider the GT because it has a solid axle. I'm especially glad they did not tart up the car to compete in that segment.
6) The Cobra will have an IRS. It will cost more. Folks will have to decide how much money the IRS ride is worth to them.
1) The Mustang was and is an affordable sports car. It will be the cheapest 300 HP V8 on the road. An IRS adds cost to the car. Period.
2) The current solid axle rides fine. The next generation GT will ride even better. Yes, an IRS will ride better over bumps. Some people want technology for technology's sake. Take them for a ride in a car and tell them it's got an IRS, then listen to the rave reviews. Tell them it's got a solid axle, and they will nitpick the ride. There are several luxury cars out there with rides that will allow you to spread your Grey Poupon with ease as you cross the railroad tracks.
3) I could care less if a magazine editor ranks the 350Z over the new Mustang because the seats made his balls feel more comfy. If you are in love with the 350Z, buy it. Don't try and change the Mustang into an American version of the 350Z. I will choose the Mustang over the 350Z because of its power, styling, and heritage.
4) Lets compare apples with apples. People are talking about their Saturn that has an IRS. It is also slower than my riding lawnmower. Stick with performance cars in the same price range. The new GT is going to be less expensive than the 350Z. It is also going to be able to walk away from the 350Z in terms of acceleration.
5) I don't care if the import car crowd won't consider the GT because it has a solid axle. I'm especially glad they did not tart up the car to compete in that segment.
6) The Cobra will have an IRS. It will cost more. Folks will have to decide how much money the IRS ride is worth to them.
i'd be fine with the solid axle. here's why:
1. it does ride perfectly fine, is simple, and has been proven to be a reasonably strong unit.
2. the advantages in ride provided by the indie setup are negligible, and although it does provdide an advantage in handling...wait, wait, you're not telling me you're buying a Mustang, which is the last vestage of muscle cars (even though it's just a pony car) for HANDLING, are you? hopefully you're buying it for its pure speed; handling is a secondary consideration, which, to me, isn't used enough in everyday driving to warrant getting your back up over, especially in a car that never was, and probably never will be meant for handling.
3. also, most of us stang guys do drag racing, while relatively few do open track work. the live axle has been proven a much better unit for drag racing. 4. besides, if you REALLY want the IRS, it's a straight bolt-in.
5. since it's america, land of the free...i say make the solid axle standard, have the IRS as an option, it wouldn't cost that much
1. it does ride perfectly fine, is simple, and has been proven to be a reasonably strong unit.
2. the advantages in ride provided by the indie setup are negligible, and although it does provdide an advantage in handling...wait, wait, you're not telling me you're buying a Mustang, which is the last vestage of muscle cars (even though it's just a pony car) for HANDLING, are you? hopefully you're buying it for its pure speed; handling is a secondary consideration, which, to me, isn't used enough in everyday driving to warrant getting your back up over, especially in a car that never was, and probably never will be meant for handling.
3. also, most of us stang guys do drag racing, while relatively few do open track work. the live axle has been proven a much better unit for drag racing. 4. besides, if you REALLY want the IRS, it's a straight bolt-in.
5. since it's america, land of the free...i say make the solid axle standard, have the IRS as an option, it wouldn't cost that much
I buy a car expecting a whole package. Especially now that there is stiff competition in the performance car market. And what do you mean the Mustang was never meant for handling? What about the Boss 302, SVO, TRX suspension, Cobra? Ford has been using handling as a major selling point for the last 25+ years. Do you know what the headline of Ford's official Mustang site says? "Turning Corners and Heads for 40 Years". They say that because the market is too competitive for a one trick pony. Modern buyers are more sophisticated than they used to be. They've updated their advertising. Isn't it time to update the car?
I'm just glad I don't have the same morning commute as some of you, who obviously drive solely on smooth, straight roads.
(&) said:What about the Boss 302, SVO, TRX suspension, Cobra? Ford has been using handling as a major selling point for the last 25+ years.
I'm just glad I don't have the same morning commute as some of you, who obviously drive solely on smooth, straight roads.
those are all special models, the boss 302 built ONLY to homologate the car for Trans-am racing; entering the T/A racing, like any racing was a marketing ploy for them to be able to sell more cars. it didn't work very well. the cobra also has always been meant for open track work; its best qualities almost never shine through on the street. don't know much about SVO's and TRX's since I don't like Fox's that much... but anyway, muscle cars, and pony cars have never been meant for handling, but rather for blistering straight-line speed. mustangs already handle more than well enough, i think, for day-to-day driving; ford needs to concentrate on the power because I'm not sure the Mustang will get respect 'till we're seeing 325hp GT's.
and my commute involves California roads, and i have no complaints about the ride from my solid axle, so if that's not a good testemony, I'm not sure what is...like I said, make the IRS an option for those who are willing to buy it, i haven't a problem with that whatsoever. it's just not for me, that's all.
jcp123 said:
What do you mean it didn't work very well!?!?!? That car is legendary....it's the most sought after vintage Mustang on the market (outside of Shelbys). In 1969, Ford sold approx. 2000 (they only needed to 1500 to homologate the engine). Yeah...the car proved to be such a failure, that Ford could only sell 5000 Boss 302's in the 1970. Let's see, the Shelby GT350 was built just to give the Mustang a road racing heritage...yeah that was big marketing failure for Ford as well.
jcp123 said:
Pony cars were meant to be sold as sporty affordable sports coupes. Muscle cars like the Fairlane 500, the GTO, the Chevelle SS, and the Plymouth Satellite were meant for straight line speed.
Geez...why don't we just go back to drum rear brakes, leaf springs, and front tires that fold under during mild cornering ( a hall mark of 65-66 Mustangs).
Still..nobody's answered my question. If the car came with IRS standards...would all those who wanted a live axle not buy it?
66Satellite
Banned
- Feb 6, 2003
- 649
- 0
- 0
(&) said:
I don't doubt you, but the type of person who would buy a S2000 or STi would never buy a Mustang, no matter how much interest they feign in it.
Mach460 said:
That's the $64,000 question. My guess is that it would be like the switch from the 5.0 to the 4.6. Took the 4.6 a few years to prove itself, and maybe even longer for the pushrod guys to accept it. Of course it always helps when there are no other options.
66Satellite said:
But do you think the Mustang is going to cut it just appealing to Mustangers and drag racers. The field is getting very crowded. And the Mustang has to do it just as well or better than the competition. I'm sure in the early 70's, nobody would ever think the Japanese would make such a big inroads into the American market. Now where are we...Toyota is poised to being the number one carmaker in the WORLD in 5 years. Heck, they've already taken Ford as number 2. If there's going to be a Mustang in 10 or 15 years, it's going to have to have an appeal beyond heritage and the hard core Mustanger.
Many of the people on this board just wave off imports and their buyers as a nuisance. But you can't discount them so easily. A potential import buyer is also a potential Mustang buyer, and Ford needs to do what they can to attract them. I've seen many cases of where people have been die hard buyers of American cars, then they go out and buy an import and swear off the Big Three.
There's absolutely no reason why Ford can't have an affordable, RWD, V-8 Sport Coupe with IRS.
66Satellite said:
Yeah...I remember how Mustangers thought the world was going to end because of the 4.6. I don't know...maybe we're just afraid of things that seem more "complicated".
Mach460 said:
-the boss 302 was not the marketing success that ford had hoped it would be. chevrolet got SLIGHTLY more marketing leverage out of the series with the z/28 but the fact that the series faltered a few years after its inception is perhaps the best evidence to support this. sure, the Boss is a legend today, but back in the day...though i agree the shelby was much more of a success marketing-wise than the boss 302
-pony cars are a subset of muscle car...
-and i don't suggest we go back to drums and high profile tires...wouldn't mind yankin the computers outa the cars though
.-i speak from a somewhat biased perspective: i've had bad experiences on the indie suspension on a ford focus...it bent ridiculously easy, i hit a pothole that i couldn't see in a rainstorm at about 25 or 30. i thought it was just a screwed up alignment, but they told me that the whole setup had been bent. that doesn't happen on a live axle, it's far more rugged. with a car that goes as fast as a mustang, i'd think some ruggedness would be most welcome...and i will state once again, the axle should be standard with the IRS optional, or even IRS standard with a delete option for a credit that puts an axle in there. in other words, give us a choice; if someone wants IRS, they should be able to get it - from the factory. if someone, like myself, wants a live axle, (s)he should be able to get it - from the factory.
66Satellite
Banned
- Feb 6, 2003
- 649
- 0
- 0
Mach460 said:
A Mustang can't and shouldn't try to compete against the 350Z or the S2000--those are 2 seat sports cars that cost more money. The Mustang has a very nice niche for itself with basically no competition. It can grow this niche with improved handling, layout and general quality, while maintaining it's great value. I would argue that it doesn't need IRS to have drastically improved handling. It CAN pull people out of Accord coupes, Acura RSXs, or even Nissan Maximas, provided they don't need big back seats for kids. And it can beat the new GTO on looks and price. So I think Ford did the right thing--keep the price down, and don't piss off the gearheads. But I agree that IRS should be an option, if not this year then soon. And I really have no doubt that it will be.
66Satellite said:
Funny you should say that. Before I really started following the progress of the new mustang, I was pretty set on a new s2000. I drove one for the first time last year and I was pretty amazed at how well sorted it was. A truly capable car that won't beat you up when all you want to do is get home at the end of the day. Excellent handling, gearbox, engine, it looks like a million bucks and the top goes down.
All that time though, I knew I'd really miss having a nice torquey rumbling V8. It's good for the soul. I've had mine for 6 years and it still puts a smile on my face.
Now that there is factual info/pics on the new car, I am definitley favoring the mustang. If Ford had just done it as a styling exercise (ala Thunderbird), I wouldn't even consider it. However, a 300hp v8 in a car that is clearly head and shoulders above the current car in almost any way you'd care to measure, and still for around $25k? And it will really look like THAT?!? I'd crawl through broken glass to test drive one tomorrow.
Omegalock said:
They are forcing everyone to take a live axle and then build or buy an IRS system to make the car better on the open road where it is supposed to be used. The majority are currently suffering for the good of the few drag racers. The good of the many always outways the good of the few. The folks who want or need IRS are forced to take the exact same step you don't want to take, that is significantly altering their cars and probably voiding their warrantees.
From the various articles that I have read, the engineers used responses from "hardcore" Mustang owners to generate their decision to go with a live axle. While remaining loyal to your existng customers is a great thing, they may have alienated a large group of potential customers.
fly2low
New Member
63_Fairlane said:
Good choice
. That will do you a real good. Talking here too much won't do you a real good. All of us have never driven the new Stang, anyway. We only speculate.While love for the Mustang is good, overzealousness simply bugs me. It just irritates me when someone just states that "Mustang is the best,etc, etc" without actually driving the competitions (cars with similar performance withing the price range).
People who shop around much usually are more satisfied with their choice (hoping it's the Stang) since they KNOW and CAN justify their reasons for buying. I've heard enough from people who were overly excited for a while after their purchase, but then start whinning shortly after "why my car doesnt have this, who does that competition car have that, etc." I just want you to be sure that you are happy with what you buy. Otherwise, it will screw the JD Powe rating and the resale value of the car later.
One more thing. Having the Mustang as the cheapest 300 hp car is good. However, having a 13.9 $30,000 300hp car is not that great. Some competitions can do better for the same money; bone stock unmodified. Mustang's biggest problem over the years are NOT power, but CONTROL. You can't utilize the power withougt proper control. You need to make those power as useful when accelates or when exiting from turns.
Well, I guess being a big-3 car engineers/designers has been really tough lately. While the competitors' engineers/designers (read: import) have to think only of 2 constraints; namely performance/function and cost, the domestic engineers also need to think about the sentimetal "retro" aspect of the vehicles. While I think retro cars are cool, I also realize that sometimes being retro means to attaching oneself to an archaic shape that was formed to follow a technological function 30 years ago. Working with more constraints, the optimum resultant will be less maximized. Oh, but well....
Postmortem said:
Explain please. I really don't see IRS/Solid axle having anything to do on ice/snow. I know we don't have the weather you have in Iowa but here our winter beaters are 4X4's, AWD, FWD. I drive a neon in winter. It's the RWD/Torque of the mustang that's the problem.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
Just a opinion from someone that was a teenager in the 60's. Remember these cars are legends and there's a lot of urban lengend out there. I had friends with Boss 302 and tried to talk my dad into letting me buy one after he said I couldn't buy a GT500 (NO GO on either, my 66 289 4v for my first car was all I could con him into). I would take the present fox body to most of the technology of the 60's. The solid axle has elvolved for 40 years and it's not your fathers car any longer. Most cars today handle better than most track cars 40 or 50 years ago. Many inprovements have been taken from the race cars even in the engine dept (roller cams etc). I would take my GT or Mach over the Boss 302 in the handling dept but it was great for the day.
Many solid axles are running round track it's just it cost a couple grand to bring them up to speed (hum the same it would be if you had to drop in IRS).
I don't think anyone really wants to go back to drum breaks or bias ply tires but the stuff on the cars your trashing is light years ahead of what we had in the 60's.
As far as the Cobra being a rounded car it's not. The vette's Z06 is a rounded car. It will take a cobra at either track because of the design and cost they spent to do it. The Cobra is a price/performance trade off. Car's are much like stereo's you can get a great one a lot cheaper than perfection.
Perfection cost a ton more money. So theree alway a give and take in a design.
One last thought for those think I'm a drag racer. Been there done that but it's not me much anymore. I my go to the track with my cars a few times but I'd build a 5.0 if I wanted to do that. I'm not tearing up my daily driver because I had to go to work everyday (done that too
). In my world with 2 lane roard and hills you have to pass when you get a chance on the roads.A low power car with IRS doesn't do jack for me, those cars your have to floor them a block before your ready to pass and then sweat it out if your going to make it. The MUSTANG you drop it in 3rd and hall a**. At 65mph I throw the Mach in 3rd to pass I'm going 90+ out the other end and usually have to lift so I don't overrun and have a problem with hitting a car head on.
Too much power is good it tight places.
The Mach flat shines on the road even in turns. The one twistie turn I do drive is a banked 35mph turn and I take that at 65-70mph you must acclerate in conors(sp) not brake or let off. Where the solid axle doesn't shine is on very rough roads but I've driven these type cars all my life and know how to handle them. A road couse isn't a rough road.
63_Fairlane said:
That's huge part of my argument that seems to be missed. People seem to think that the Mustang can do no worng...and if you don't like it, go buy an import. Well that's the problem.....somebody who buys an import is somebody who could have bought a Mustang. The buying public is a lot more sophisticated than people give them credit for. The market is getting very crowded (especially in the Mustangs price point), and people have shown a willingness to spend a little extra (whether it's for power, handling or some little elctronic doodad) if they see good value in it.
ttown said:
Obvoiusly you have never seen Indianapolis Raceway Park (road course), Las Vegas raceway park, Hallett, Etc. Road america is even getting rougher all the time and using the curbs there gets you around that place the fastest.
There are always advantages to controlling the wheels independantly, and IRS provides a BIG advantage in reduced unsprung weight.
As for round track, if NASCAR changed its rules to give a choice between live axle or IRS...
Similar threads
