An intresting article on the 05 in the Winnipeg Free Press.

Discussion in '2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-' started by Omegalock, Jan 15, 2004.

  1. Thanks to Shatner_saves for brining this to notice.

    There's the link for those that want to read it but here are the intresting things I thought about it.

    Now I personally really don't have any intrest in an IRS. I guess I'm part of that 30% the Ford engineer was talking about that will do more drag racing than road racing but reading that from the horses mouth makes me a little po'ed.
    I mean you will add an option for a 1000 watt stereo but WON'T offer a very much asked for IRS for the same cost?
    What the hell is that? I'm sorry I simply do not understand the logic of them not at least offering it as an option. I was always defending Ford against the detractors for them not offering IRS due to I thought it would be costly. But to have them openly admit yes the IRS option would have cost around 300 bucks and NO we aren't going to include it makes no sense to me at all.
  2. doesn't matter to me either way.....but why WOULDN'T you put an option on a car that only costs $300?? Especially if you more or less KNOW that a certain percentage of the people are going to buy them. That's absurd.
  3. Of course that's absurd. If 30% are going to drag race them (that's high, in my opinion), why didn't they put IRS standard for those who of us who are going to drive them in the real world, on roads with bumps and curves, and offer the live axle as an option for the straightahead racers??? That would have been the correct marketing decision, in this MBAs experienced opinion.
  4. $300 to the customer or something like $600 to the customer? I'm not really too hung up on this IRS thing. Still, I agree it would be cool to have on the option list. Actually, to tie this in with the sub $20k thread, why not put the solid axle on the v6 and base V8 car (which is what a lot of the people who are going to be taking this car to the track would want anyway) and have IRS standard on the higher priced GT? Viola. Problem solved. Hey, why not make the base V8 car a solid axle notchback--that would be really cool. And the GT a IRS fastback.
  5. IRS will appear, how and when is the question. I find it very hard to believe that it won't be an option on the GT, especially if it can be had for under $1000.

    Personally, I would buy it. I live 1 hour from Road America and I would love to go there for track days and give it a work out. I would love to see how an IRS equipped GT would stack up against an E36 BMW M3. I bet it would more than hold it's own.

    A live axle will work, but, all things being equal, IRS will work better.

    Actually, Here is what I want:

    5.0L sohc 3v atmospheric motor, 320-350 hp/tq
    race tuned suspension, (I should be in advertizing)
    Lightweight forged wheels
    Fog light delete,
    rear wing delete,
    rear seat delete
    cloth seats,
    crank windows,
    non-power door locks (I can [email protected]#king reach across),
    $25K-$27k. (with the optional cage and suede racing buckets).

    Is that so hard? Ford?
  6. Count me in the 30% that will drag race. I am probably one of the psycho's that will end up buying a used 03 Cobra, and in the end, yanking the IRS to put in an 8.8 or 9" with some gears!

    I think we all just need to be patient...I think the IRS will show up as an option, also, we really don't know what the special edition cars will be.

    The Boss 302 was a road race car, and while it may or may not receive a huge boost in HP, I would think this would be a perfect car to put the IRS on.

    Bear something else in's also about keeping the Cobra a 'premium' brand, and the 6 speed, IRS, and other goodies do set that nameplate above the GT.

    Sir Hacksalot
  7. I would love to see the IRS as an option. I really want one, but a Cobra is out of my price range.

    Hopefully Ford will get the message.
  8. Thats hilarious you guys actually quoted something from the winnipeg free press!!

    haha, i read that exact article a week or so ago. (Im in winnipeg, if you didnt notice)
  9. This is why writers are writers and not engineers.

    300 dollars at COST is a hell of a lot more money then a 300 dollar RETAIL sound option. that 300 dollar retail option could be at 400% over cost possibly even higher. meaning it only really costs Ford 50-70 bucks at COST for a 300 dollar retail speaker upgrade. You'd be surprised at how low it acutally costs Ford to make a mustang.

    This is simply a writer not thinking before talking.
  10. That's what I was wondering. The wording is vague. Could mean it cost Ford or cost the customer. I wonder what kind of markup there is on most options. I always assumed it was pretty massive. Which is why I tend to like cars with the best platform/drivetrain and no bells and whistles.

    Also, how do you calculate the true "cost" of a vehicle? Do you include all the marketing, development, management, etc, costs? Or purely from a manufacturing standpoint?
  11. See at this point, its not like they don't have to do the R/D for it anyway (Cobra WILL have it) why not spread the cost over to the cars that sell way more, and dilute what it will cost to have it on the Cobra.

    If it costs 500 a unit per only cobra's in the 5-10k cars....
    It could cost 200 a unit per GTs/Cobra's in the 50-100k cars range.
    More for less, or less for more.
  12. I look at it like this. the winnipeg writer reads some footnote about Tha-Tang stating that an IRS for the new mustang would cost Ford 300 dollars. Engineers tend to look at things diffrerently then marketing people. Its always about what this and that costs Ford, they generally don't worry about the end comsumer price much. So without thinking, the Winnipeg writer reads some data on some whizbang radio option that costs the END USER 300 dollars. see the confusion? Now I really don't know for sure, since this is just speculation and conjecture. But generally an IRS should cost more then 300 dollars to an end customer as well as I just don't see ford spending 300 dollars AT COST on a radio system upgrade.
  13. Ok, just looked up that 1000 watt stereo on the 2004 Mustang on Edmunds. That's a $1,300 option. :rolleyes: So that shows the markup on this "$300" item. Ok, so would you pay $1,300 for IRS? Ford must have decided that for most Mustang buyers the answer to that question was no.
  14. so i guess I was half wrong and half right. 300 dollars is cost to ford, not the end user.
    but the stereo is in fact 300 dollars cost to ford (they're crazy, lol)
    so the actual cost the IRS components would raise the car up to around 1300 dollars base. that's substantial for a low cost sports car. Now I still think there is still more hidden cost in implementing an IRS over an upgraded stereo, such as modifcations to the exhaust and other mechanics. It's probably much easier to install a stereo upgrade. though 1300 dollars for a ford sound system is ludicrious. you can get much much better for the money.

    but what are we all arguing about anyways? the future cobra will have an IRS, right?
  15. I agree 100%. Hope it didn't seem like I was arguing.
  16. oh no. I didn't mean it like that. It was an informative discussion. =)
  17. According to the rumor mill the 05 chassis was designed with IRS in mind and a live axle was put in instead. So I don't think it'd be hard to put IRS in for an option list. And it's an argueable point because somebody might have 1500 bucks for an IRS on a GT but not have an extra 12-15k bucks to plop down on a Cobra. Like I said I think the live axle as stock equipment was the best choice. If there really is 30% that STATE they drag race and assuming the others who don't road race really likely wouldn't care either way(I mean before I really really got into cars I didn't know what an IRS was much less what it meant in ride quality so really the lack there of wouldn't hurt or really improve sales of the Stang a whole ton),but it SHOULD be an option. If that info is accurate and it only costs Ford 300 bucks then I'm sorry that's just flat out myopic not to offer it. Maybe they will offer it on the base GT as an option in the future and decided to hold their cards.

  18. ------------------------------------------------------------------

    I'll give you an exact reason why an independent suspension was not given with the base or the GT. It's because Ford wants to use it as one of many separations between the GT and the Cobra version of the Mustang (which I hear will debut in fall 2005). :bang:
  19. I'm sure everyone who wants IRS will be able to get a nice aftermarket setup after about six months.

    The funny thing is, the more people badmouth Ford's decision to stick with the solid rear axle, the happier I am about it. Heck, I wish they still made a pushrod like GM, lol. The only things that have annoyed me about the Mustang up to now were the outdated, flexy chassis, big front overhang (ugly IMO) and sketchy gas tank setup. Ford is fixing all these things, plus they improved the front suspsension, made the interior prettier and the backseat bigger, and they're covering it all with some very nice sheetmetal and adding a few more HP. Price? About the same (maybe lower if they really do make a base V8 car). What else could you want?
  20. Haha, I was just thinkin the same thing. Good article though, I have it sitting beside me.