IRS poll

Discussion in '2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-' started by Zinc001, Jan 15, 2004.


What would you prefer to buy a mustang with?

  1. I.R.S.

    85 vote(s)
  2. Solid Rear Axle

    74 vote(s)
  1. Everyone keeps talking about having irs or solid rear axle. So why don't we do our own poll and see what comes out of it. I realize that it's not an option but if it was what would you get?
  2. -----------------------------------

    They're not making it an option on the GT, because they want to use it to define the Cobra Mustang, which I believe will come out roughly a year after the GT makes it's debut.
  3. In my estimation, outside the very narrow, peculiar and esoteric realm of hard core drag racing, which in reality would only account for a very small, if vociforace, fraction of Mustang buyers, a good IRS represents a far better overall ride AND handling solution.

    While a live axle can be made to handle well, at least on very smooth roads, that is achieved only at a far greater detriment to compliance and ride quality, basically you can have either one or the other -- good ride OR good handling -- but not both.

    With a good IRS, you can have your cake and eat it too, garnering excellent handling abilities over a far greater range of road surfaces all the while retaining far better ride qualities.

    For narrowly focused drag racers, which are disproportionally represented on this board, that simply is not important.

    For the vast majority of Mustang owners, those improved ride AND handling qualities, even if they aren't aware of how they are achieved technically, are significant benefits they are sure to enjoy in real world (off track) conditions.

  4. I totally agree. I also agree in that I think the drag racers got way too much say about the rear suspension. Especially if you read the Mustang enthusiasts magazines, they made it seem like IRS was the worse thing for the Mustang since the Mustang II (no offense to said owners). Let's face facts, a majority of Mustang owners are going to go to the strip for a Wednesday Grudge Night. But being a road racer at heart, I'm biased. However in terms of real world conditions (and living in New England), and IRS would have been a better solution. I'll reserve judgement until I drive one. If there's any hope on the horizon is that the '06 Cobra will have IRS (if there's even an 06 Cobra). Supposedly, the platform was designed to accpet both the live axle and the IRS without compromising either set-up, so we shall see.
  5. You left out cheaper and more durable. You don't have to go to the track to appreciate those two advantages. Sure, if you plan to push your car to the limits in the twisties, or you're an old guy with a bad back, IRS is better. But if you're a knuckle dragging American car enthusiast you might apprecaite having the extra $1500 for mods or gas or beer.
  6. The chassis was designed with IRS in mind, so yes, we will see it as an option soon. I voted for IRS, and maybe I'm just being optimistic, but I bet the GT will have excellent handling/cornering characterstics along with an improved ride. The current car already corners much better than people give it credit for. And the solid reared F-body is a beast on the autox/roadcoarse. Even though I want IRS, a solid rear really isn't that bad when set up properly.
  7. But why can't I be a knuckle dragging American car enthusiast with the IRS. I want to be able to trun 11's in a straight, but not have to say hail mary's everytime I get onto the highway off ramp in the rain...or doing the Mustang Two Step everytime I go over a bridge expansion joint. And who's to say the IRS would have been that much more expensive. The 05 is based off the DEW98 platform, so the engineering and initial costs for an IRS would have already been bourne out with the Lincoln LS, Jaguar S-Type, and the T-Bird.
  8. Cheaper, yeah, though I wonder what Ford's overall development and tooling expenditure will be for two rear suspension designs, money that will all have to be recouped with higher sales prices for all Stangs. I think the real reason was expediency, the current DEW IRS was itself too expensive and compromised rear seating, though why that's very important in a 2+2 Mustang is beyond me. I suspect, given a true clean sheet of paper, developing and tooling for only an IRS would have been the best investment overall.

    As for durability, sure, to paraphrase a certain quote, if you plan to push your car to the limits on the strip, a live axle does have a somewhat lower part count, but durability is far more a factor of good materials, engineering and assembly.

    I certainly am an American car enthusiast, though I gave up knuckle-dragging about 5 million years ago. And yes, I do plan on pushing my car in the twisties, and why not, being a performance car enthusiast (good performance is NOT only staight line, there are another 359 degrees to the performance envelope beyond dead ahead.) And I also enjoy a degree of ride compliance TOO. I prefer to indulge of my car's performance far more than for just the occasional 13 second spurt on a narrow range of streets or artificial confines of a strip. And no, I'm not a bad-backed geezer looking for a marshmallow ride. Quite to the contrary, I would like a firm yet supple suspension with the sophistication and compliance to maintain a high level of lateral performance over more than billiards smooth roads and/or tracks.

    The $500-1500 dollars I'd save with a truck axle would quickly be exhausted and then some trying to fit an aftermarket IRS to enjoy the very real ride AND handling benefits offered by an IRS over a buggy axle, leaving little for gas or beer.
  9. Well said Mach 460 and rhumbline. I'm mostly playing devil's advocate here. But I'm guessing the new car will be a big improvement over the current car and that the IRS thing won't seem like such a big deal. I'm also used to driving a 3800 pound 60s Mopar with overboosted power steering, torsion bars and leaf springs, which definitely keeps things interesting.
  10. I agree as well. My last three cars (Murker,300zx,240sx) all had IRS and you cannot even begin to compare the difference. I will be getting an 05 or an 06 Mustang either way, but wish that they would make it an option. I may go the route of an 06 Cobra, but the price is so much higher because of everything else you get with the Cobra.
  11. Well said! :hail2:

    I want IRS, but I do not want a Cobra, so instead of buying a 2005, I will wait and see if IRS becomes and option for 2006 or 2007.
  12. I'd love to see what ford can do with a chassis designed for IRS... if I could afford the option I would love to get it...
  13. Let IRS "ONLY" be an option. You hear? ONLY and option. By adding IRS as standard equipment, the Mustang GT will deviate from being a straight line drag musclecar anymore. IRS is not good for drag racing. Period. I don't care what you IRS fanatics think. It will also make the car more expensive to buy. But for the people in here that want IRS to be available, have it "ONLY" as an option and NOT as standard equipment. And be prepared to get ripped off even more by Ford if you buy a GT with IRS.
  14. Mellow out dude! :notnice:

    So you say IRS is not any good for a drag car. Go take your Mustang out and race a recent model Corvette or a 1966 Shelby 427 Cobra or a Ferrari F1 and let us know how you make out. :rlaugh:

    I have another suggestion. If you don't want do get ripped off by Ford Motor, DO NOT BUY ANY OF THEIR CARS! :rolleyes:
  15. :stupid:

    Listen to this man.
  16. If it were just that simple. Now the rest of the story, it's not I'm against IRS on standard Mustangs but what if he had put real world assumpitions in his poll?

    This would increase the price sticker of the GT some $1500 to $2000 dollars making it around $29k to 30K and increase the weight to around 3700 lbs.

    Many on this board including me think the new GTo at 3700+lbs is far too heavy and the price too high compared to buying a Cobra. Now we want to reduce it by 50hp and make it 3k cheaper than the current GTO sounds like some want to make the Mustang the new GTo.

    I would think this would make a big difference. Let's face it I'd love to have a Viper and would vote in a poll to get one but that 80k price tag is what holds me up :shrug:
  17. I'm with Ron just minus the Ford Moco hatred.

    I personally want a solid axle. I have no need for it. I live in the land of flat straight wide roads and I grew up driving old RWD cars and trucks so I have a high tolerance for a bone jarring ride. I actually think I prefer it(feels like you are riding a bucking Bronco :D). However I do think the IRS should be an option for those that want it. They by all means SHOULD NOT put IRS on them standard. I'm sorry but I shouldn't have to subsidize the few that want IRS. I'd be highly po'ed if Ford did a 180 and stuck an IRS on the thing stock and I had to pay extra to get the car then pay even more later on switching it to a live axle or replacing a half shaft after the thing explodes all over the drag strip.
  18. "The few that want IRS."

    Last I checked, it was the few that wanted the ox-cart axle: 63% to 37%. But yeah, an IRS as an option would be fine, and leave the truck axle for the flatlanders and drag racers. I don't think it would increase the weight to 3700, maybe increasing it 100 lbs max over the live axle. And while no telling how Ford may jack the price, but I imagine it could come in around $500-750.

    And properly designed IRS can do well on the strip as I think legions of Vettes and Vipers will attest to. Is it optimal for the Nth degree hard core drag racers, which probably represent a small part of one percent of Mustangs driven? Probably not, but they can be made to work quite well and durably, presuming proper engineering.
  19. You are correct Rumb, however since it appears that the public wants IRS 2:1 over solid, I think that IRS should be standard on the GT with solid axle and option for those hard core drag types. On the V6 the solid should be standard to have a low entry price but IRS should be optional.

    But I really don't care which way Ford does it, as long as I can buy IRS on a Mustang GT and its less than a $1,000 option at invoice price I'll be satisfied. But if IRS cost me $500 or less I'll be jumping for joy. :banana:

    I hope Ford is seeing this poll. If not its time that we start writing & e-mailing Ford to tell them we want IRS and don't want to have to buy a SVT model to get IRS.